HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ramirez-Zea, M. Articles by Stein, A. D Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ramirez-Zea, M. Articles by Stein, A. D Agricola Articles by Ramirez-Zea, M. Articles by Stein, A. D

Anthropometric predictors of body fat as measured by hydrostatic weighing in Guatemalan adults^1,2,3

¹ From the Institute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama, Guatemala City, Guatemala (MR-Z and BT), and the Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA (ADS and RM)

Background: Most predictive equations currently used to assess percentage body fat (%BF) were derived from persons in industrialized Western societies.

Objective: We developed equations to predict %BF from anthropometric measurements in rural and urban Guatemalan adults.

Design: Body density was measured in 123 women and 114 men by using hydrostatic weighing and simultaneous measurement of residual lung volume. Anthropometric measures included weight (in kg), height (in cm), 4 skinfold thicknesses [(STs) in mm], and 6 circumferences (in cm). Sex-specific multiple linear regression models were developed with %BF as the dependent variable and age, residence (rural or urban), and all anthropometric measures as independent variables (the "full" model). A "simplified" model was developed by using age, residence, weight, height, and arm, abdominal, and calf circumferences as independent variables.

Results: The preferred full models were %BF = –80.261 – (weight x 0.623) + (height x 0.214) + (tricipital ST x 0.379) + (abdominal ST x 0.202) + (abdominal circumference x 0.940) + (thigh circumference x 0.316); root mean square error (RMSE) = 3.0; and pure error (PE) = 3.4 for men and %BF = –15.471 + (tricipital ST x 0.332) + (subscapular ST x 0.154) + (abdominal ST x 0.119) + (hip circumference x 0.356); RMSE = 2.4; and PE = 2.9 for women. The preferred simplified models were %BF = –48.472 – (weight x 0.257) + (abdominal circumference x 0.989); RMSE = 3.8; and PE = 3.7 for men and %BF = 19.420 + (weight x 0.385) – (height x 0.215) + (abdominal circumference x 0.265); RMSE = 3.5; and PE = 3.5 for women.

Conclusion: These equations performed better in this developing-country population than did previously published equations.

Key Words: Body composition • anthropometry • adiposity • adults • body fat • obesity • developing country • Guatemala

This article has been cited by other articles:

				C Corvalan, C. Gregory, M Ramirez-Zea, R Martorell, and A. Stein Size at birth, infant, early and later childhood growth and adult body composition: a prospective study in a stunted population Int. J. Epidemiol., June 1, 2007; 36(3): 550 - 557. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. O. Gregory, J. Dai, M. Ramirez-Zea, and A. D. Stein Occupation Is More Important than Rural or Urban Residence in Explaining the Prevalence of Metabolic and Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Guatemalan Adults J. Nutr., May 1, 2007; 137(5): 1314 - 1319. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]