IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0122291.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison between Multiple Regression Models and CUN-BAE Equation to Predict Body Fat in Adults

Author

Listed:
  • Pilar Fuster-Parra
  • Miquel Bennasar-Veny
  • Pedro Tauler
  • Aina Yañez
  • Angel A López-González
  • Antoni Aguiló

Abstract

Background: Because the accurate measure of body fat (BF) is difficult, several prediction equations have been proposed. The aim of this study was to compare different multiple regression models to predict BF, including the recently reported CUN-BAE equation. Methods: Multi regression models using body mass index (BMI) and body adiposity index (BAI) as predictors of BF will be compared. These models will be also compared with the CUN-BAE equation. For all the analysis a sample including all the participants and another one including only the overweight and obese subjects will be considered. The BF reference measure was made using Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis. Results: The simplest models including only BMI or BAI as independent variables showed that BAI is a better predictor of BF. However, adding the variable sex to both models made BMI a better predictor than the BAI. For both the whole group of participants and the group of overweight and obese participants, using simple models (BMI, age and sex as variables) allowed obtaining similar correlations with BF as when the more complex CUN-BAE was used (ρ = 0:87 vs. ρ = 0:86 for the whole sample and ρ = 0:88 vs. ρ = 0:89 for overweight and obese subjects, being the second value the one for CUN-BAE). Conclusions: There are simpler models than CUN-BAE equation that fits BF as well as CUN-BAE does. Therefore, it could be considered that CUN-BAE overfits. Using a simple linear regression model, the BAI, as the only variable, predicts BF better than BMI. However, when the sex variable is introduced, BMI becomes the indicator of choice to predict BF.

Suggested Citation

  • Pilar Fuster-Parra & Miquel Bennasar-Veny & Pedro Tauler & Aina Yañez & Angel A López-González & Antoni Aguiló, 2015. "A Comparison between Multiple Regression Models and CUN-BAE Equation to Predict Body Fat in Adults," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-13, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0122291
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122291
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0122291
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0122291&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0122291?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rafael Molina-Luque & Aina M Yañez & Miquel Bennasar-Veny & Manuel Romero-Saldaña & Guillermo Molina-Recio & Ángel-Arturo López-González, 2020. "A Comparison of Equation Córdoba for Estimation of Body Fat (ECORE-BF) with Other Prediction Equations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-11, October.
    2. Rafael Molina-Luque & Manuel Romero-Saldaña & Carlos Álvarez-Fernández & Miquel Bennasar-Veny & Álvaro Álvarez-López & Guillermo Molina-Recio, 2019. "Equation Córdoba: A Simplified Method for Estimation of Body Fat (ECORE-BF)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-13, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0122291. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.