Comparison of Body Scanner and Manual Anthropometric Measurements of Body Shape: A Systematic Review.
anthropometry
body scanner
reliability
validity
waist circumference
whole-body imaging
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 06 2021
08 06 2021
Historique:
received:
12
05
2021
revised:
03
06
2021
accepted:
04
06
2021
entrez:
2
7
2021
pubmed:
3
7
2021
medline:
27
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Anthropometrics are a set of direct quantitative measurements of the human body's external dimensions, which can be used as indirect measures of body composition. Due to a number of limitations of conventional manual techniques for the collection of body measurements, advanced systems using three-dimensional (3D) scanners are currently being employed, despite being a relatively new technique. A systematic review was carried out using Pubmed, Medline and the Cochrane Library to assess whether 3D scanners offer reproducible, reliable and accurate data with respect to anthropometrics. Although significant differences were found, 3D measurements correlated strongly with measurements made by conventional anthropometry, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and air displacement plethysmography (ADP), among others. In most studies (61.1%), 3D scanners were more accurate than these other techniques; in fact, these scanners presented excellent accuracy or reliability. 3D scanners allow automated, quick and easy measurements of different body tissues. Moreover, they seem to provide reproducible, reliable and accurate data that correlate well with the other techniques used.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34201258
pii: ijerph18126213
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18126213
pmc: PMC8230172
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2017 Nov;71(11):1329-1335
pubmed: 28876331
Obes Open Access. 2016 Nov;2(3):
pubmed: 28042607
PeerJ. 2017 Feb 9;5:e2980
pubmed: 28289559
Public Health Nutr. 2013 Feb;16(2):281-8
pubmed: 22626254
Skin Res Technol. 2009 Aug;15(3):364-9
pubmed: 19624434
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018 Aug;72(8):1191-1194
pubmed: 29288245
J Am Coll Nutr. 2010 Jun;29(3):179-88
pubmed: 20833990
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018 May;72(5):680-687
pubmed: 29748657
Am J Clin Nutr. 2006 Apr;83(4):809-16
pubmed: 16600932
PeerJ. 2014 Jul 29;2:e495
pubmed: 25101227
BMJ Open. 2016 Dec 8;6(12):e011458
pubmed: 27932337
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2020 Jul;74(7):1054-1064
pubmed: 31685968
Work. 2018;59(3):325-339
pubmed: 29630575
Lasers Surg Med. 2009 Dec;41(10):767-73
pubmed: 20014255
Indian J Med Res. 2018 Nov;148(5):648-658
pubmed: 30666990
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 3;12(7):e0180201
pubmed: 28672039
Pediatr Res. 2017 May;81(5):736-744
pubmed: 28052064
Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 Dec 1;110(6):1316-1326
pubmed: 31553429
Ann Hum Biol. 1994 Nov-Dec;21(6):571-7
pubmed: 7840496
Work. 2017;57(1):9-21
pubmed: 28506007
PLoS One. 2015 Mar 06;10(3):e0119430
pubmed: 25749283
Sci Rep. 2016 May 26;6:26672
pubmed: 27225483
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016 Nov;70(11):1265-1270
pubmed: 27329614