Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Participant demographics, injury characteristics, MRI outcomes, anthropometric measurements and biomarkers of cardiometabolic disease.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Linear regression models were used to find Pearson correlation coefficients and part correlations, with adjustments for age as a covariate, between magnetic-resonance imaging outcomes of central adiposity and biomarkers of cardiometabolic disease.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 1.

Associations between magnetic-resonance imaging (MRI) visceral adipose tissue cross-sectional area (VATCSA) and anthropometric measurements of central adiposity; seated abdominal (A) and waist (B) circumference and, supine abdominal (C) and waist (D) circumference. Lines of best fit (fixed) are shown for each correlation, along with Pearson correlation co-efficient values (r), significance (P) and specific linear regression equations. Population specific cutoffs, corresponding to 100cm2 VATCSA, are highlighted by the dashed lines.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 3.

Linear regression models were used to find Pearson correlation coefficients and part correlations, with adjustments for age as a covariate, between anthropometric measurements of central adiposity and biomarkers of cardiometabolic disease.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Differences in cardiometabolic disease risk biomarkers [triglycerides (TG) (A), insulin sensitivity (Si) (B), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (C) and peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) (D) among participants dichotomized per multi-axial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) visceral adipose tissue cross-sectional area (VATCSA) (< 100cm2, n = 11; ≥ 100cm2, n = 10). P values are shown for significant differences (P < 0.05).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Differences in cardiometabolic disease risk biomarkers [triglycerides (TG) (E), insulin sensitivity (Si) (F), total cholesterol (G), Non-HDL (H) among participants dichotomized per the derived supine waist circumference cutoff for central adiposity (< 86.5cm, n = 12; ≥ 86.5cm, n = 10).

P values are shown for significant differences (P < 0.05).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 4.

Generated population specific seated/supine AC and WC cutoff points with averaged and standard deviation for the cardiometabolic risk factors chosen in the current study.

More »

Table 4 Expand