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

Fig 1.

Types of levels of human body composition.

A) According to level of analysis B) According to degree of accuracy of referent or field tests.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 1.

Characteristics and body composition of the participants.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Inter-methods differences in fat mass estimation: BIA (athlete and non-athlete equations) and Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT) against DXA.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Inter-methods differences in muscle mass and bone mineral content estimation: anthropometry (DK-ANT) against DXA.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 2.

Comparison of predicted percentage of fat mass (FM %) between Durnin & Womersley anthropometry (DW-ANT) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in climbers by Bland and Altman plots.

The central line represents inter-method differences. Upper and lower broken lines represent the 95% limit of agreement (inter-methods difference ± 1.96 sd of the differences).

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Comparison of predicted muscle mass (kg) between Deborah-Kerr anthropometry (DK-ANT) and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in climbers by Bland and Altman plots.

Central line represents inter-method differences. Upper and lower broken lines represent the 95% limit of agreement (inter-method difference ± 1.96 sd of the differences).

More »

Fig 3 Expand