Literature DB >> 28241463

Correction: Farina, G.L., et al. A Smartphone Application for Personal Assessments of Body Composition and Phenotyping. Sensors 2016, 16, 2163.

Gian Luca Farina1, Fabrizio Spataro2, Antonino De Lorenzo3, Henry C Lukaski4.   

Abstract

The authors wish to make the following corrections to Table 1 of their paper [...].

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 28241463      PMCID: PMC5375720          DOI: 10.3390/s17030434

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sensors (Basel)        ISSN: 1424-8220            Impact factor:   3.576


The authors wish to make the following corrections to Table 1 of their paper [1]:
Table 1

Physical characteristics of 117 study participants. Values are mean ± SD (range of values).

FemalesMales
n6354
Age, year38.7 ± 13.832.5 ± 9.8
(19 to 65)(19 to 54)
Weight, kg70.9 ± 15.682.0 ± 13.2
(41.8 to 108.7)(63.4 to 108.4)
Height, cm162.7 ± 6.1178.0 ± 7.7
(152.0 to 174.9)(163.0 to 194.5)
BMI a, kg/m243.8 ± 12.662.8 ± 16.7
(16.1 to 40.4)(19.4 to 37.1)
Fat-free mass b, kg43.8 ± 12.662.8 ± 16.7
(31.9 to 62.8)(47.4 to 80.3)
Fat mass b, kg27.2 ± 12.719.2 ± 10.0
(7.4 to 59.4)(6.2 to 44.6)
Body fat%36.6 ± 10.822.5 ± 8.9
(12.3 to 54.5)(9.6 to 44.9)

a Body mass index; b Dual X-ray absorptiometry.

As you may notice in the former Table 1, shown here, the mean values for BMI are 43.8 ± 12.6 for females and 62.7 ± 16.7 for males that are identical to the values for fat-free mass in the line below. Physical characteristics of 117 study participants. Values are mean ± SD (range of values). a Body mass index; b Dual X-ray absorptiometry. The BMI values (mean ± SD) shown in Table 1 are erroneous since the range of values is a minimum of 16.1 to a maximum of 40.4 with a reported mean of 43.8 for females, and a minimum of 19.4 to a maximum of 37.1 with a mean of 62.8 for males. Therefore, the listed and incorrect mean values exceed the maximum values for females and males, respectively. The mean value for the BMI should be 26.8 ± 5.8 for females and 25.9 ± 4.2 for males. Therefore we want to replace the above table with this correct version shown below: Physical characteristics of 117 study participants. Values are mean ± SD (range of values). a Body mass index; b Dual X-ray absorptiometry. We apologize for any inconvenience these changes have caused to readers. These changes do not affect the results of this research. The manuscript will be updated and the original will remain online on the article webpage.
Table 1

Physical characteristics of 117 study participants. Values are mean ± SD (range of values).

FemalesMales
n6354
Age, year38.7 ± 13.832.5 ± 9.8
(19 to 65)(19 to 54)
Weight, kg70.9 ± 15.682.0 ± 13.2
(41.8 to 108.7)(63.4 to 108.4)
Height, cm162.7 ± 6.1178.0 ± 7.7
(152.0 to 174.9)(163.0 to 194.5)
BMI a, kg/m226.8 ± 5.825.9 ± 4.2
(16.1 to 40.4)(19.4 to 37.1)
Fat-free mass b, kg43.8 ± 12.662.8 ± 16.7
(31.9 to 62.8)(47.4 to 80.3)
Fat mass b, kg27.2 ± 12.719.2 ± 10.0
(7.4 to 59.4)(6.2 to 44.6)
Body fat%36.6 ± 10.822.5 ± 8.9
(12.3 to 54.5)(9.6 to 44.9)

a Body mass index; b Dual X-ray absorptiometry.

  1 in total

1.  A Smartphone Application for Personal Assessments of Body Composition and Phenotyping.

Authors:  Gian Luca Farina; Fabrizio Spataro; Antonino De Lorenzo; Henry Lukaski
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2016-12-17       Impact factor: 3.576

  1 in total
  1 in total

1.  High-Resolution Three-Dimensional Photonic Scan-Derived Equations Improve Body Surface Area Prediction in Diverse Populations.

Authors:  Maxine Ashby-Thompson; Ying Ji; Jack Wang; Wen Yu; John C Thornton; Carla Wolper; Richard Weil; Earle C Chambers; Blandine Laferrère; F Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Dympna Gallagher
Journal:  Obesity (Silver Spring)       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 5.002

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.