Mueller William H, Taylor Wendell C, Chan Wenyaw, Sangi-Haghpeykar Haleh, Snider Sharon A, Hsu Hai-An
University of Texas-Houston Health Science Center, Graduate School of Public Health, Houston, Texas 77030.
Baylor College of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Houston, Texas 77030.
Am J Hum Biol. 1996;8(3):325-329. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1520-6300(1996)8:3<325::AID-AJHB3>3.0.CO;2-Z.
Precision estimates are given for anthropometric assessment of body fat distribution in participants (n = 86) of the Healthy Growth Study (total n = 154). This five year longitudinal study explored the psychosocial and biologic influences on activity levels in urban adolescent African American girls. The basic anthropometric data include height, weight, four body and limb circumferences, and five skinfold measurements. It is proposed that ratio indices of body fat distribution are likely to have poorer precisions than the single variables which they comprise, and that ratios based on skinfolds may be particularly sensitive to this problem. The precision of the body mass index (BMI) and principal components of skinfold fatness and fat distribution are also considered. Precisions were greater than 0.95 (intraclass correlation from a random-effects analysis of variance) for most anthropometric dimensions and indices, including the BMI and the first principal component of fatness. However, three of the five skinfolds had lower precisions (0.84-0.93). In contrast, the precisions of all indices of body fat distribution were 0.90 or less (range: 0.57-0.87 skinfold ratios; 0.83-0.90 circumference ratios). Of the ratios, conicity was most stable at 0.90 for repeated measures by both the same and different observers. A second principal component of central fat did not have precisions noticeably better than skinfold ratios (0.79-0.82). Indices of fat distribution may have lower reliabilities than the single variables that they comprise, because errors may be compounded when dividing one variable by another or in linear combinations of measurements other than the first principal component. This problem should be taken into account in clinical and epidemiologic investigations of body fat distribution. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
对健康成长研究（总样本量n = 154）中86名参与者的身体脂肪分布进行人体测量评估时给出了精度估计。这项为期五年的纵向研究探讨了城市非裔美国少女活动水平的心理社会和生物学影响。基本人体测量数据包括身高、体重、四个身体和肢体周长以及五个皮褶测量值。有人提出，身体脂肪分布的比率指数的精度可能比其组成的单个变量更差，并且基于皮褶的比率可能对这个问题特别敏感。还考虑了体重指数（BMI）以及皮褶脂肪度和脂肪分布的主成分的精度。对于大多数人体测量维度和指数，包括BMI和脂肪度的第一主成分，精度大于0.95（来自随机效应方差分析的组内相关性）。然而，五个皮褶中有三个精度较低（0.84 - 0.93）。相比之下，所有身体脂肪分布指数的精度均为0.90或更低（范围：皮褶比率为0.57 - 0.87；周长比率为0.83 - 0.90）。在这些比率中，锥度对于同一观察者和不同观察者的重复测量最为稳定，为0.90。中心脂肪的第二主成分的精度并不比皮褶比率（0.79 - 0.82）明显更好。脂肪分布指数的可靠性可能低于其组成的单个变量，因为当一个变量除以另一个变量或在除第一主成分之外的测量值的线性组合中时，误差可能会叠加。在身体脂肪分布的临床和流行病学调查中应考虑这个问题。© 1996 Wiley - Liss, Inc.
