Table 2 SFT depth comparison of MRI, US and Caliper at 4 sites.

From: Measurement of subcutaneous fat tissue: reliability and comparison of caliper and ultrasound via systematic body mapping

MRI vs. US (n = 50)

MRI

US

d

ICC

Region (field)

Mean ± SD (cm)

 

Bizeps (2)

0.62 ± 0.35

0.82 ± 0.52

− 0.20 ± 0.38

0.593

Abdomen (15)

2.52 ± 1.26

2.71 ± 1.34

− 0.19 ± 0.41

0.942

Mid front thigh (36)

1.15 ± 0.62

1.20 ± 0.62

− 0.06 ± 0.21

0.938

Mid lateral thigh (39)

1.03 ± 0.75

1.09 ± 0.78

− 0.06 ± 0.31

0.891

MRI vs. Caliper (n = 50)

MRI

Caliper

d

ICC

bizeps (2)

0.62 ± 0.35

0.54 ± 0.35

0.08 ± 0.27

0.688

abdomen (15)

2.52 ± 1.26

1.26 ± 0.61

1.26 ± 0.80

0.374

mid front thigh (36)

1.15 ± 0.62

1.07 ± 0.54

0.07 ± 0.32

0.849

mid lateral thigh (39)

1.03 ± 0.75

1.01 ± 0.66

0.02 ± 0.41

0.835

US vs. C (n = 50)

US

Caliper

d

ICC

bizeps (2)

0.82 ± 0.52

0.54 ± 0.35

0.28 ± 0.31

0.633

abdomen (15)

2.71 ± 1.34

1.26 ± 0.61

1.45 ± 0.90

0.318

mid front thigh (36)

1.20 ± 0.62

1.07 ± 0.54

0.13 ± 0.28

0.862

mid lateral thigh (39)

1.09 ± 0.78

1.01 ± 0.66

0.08 ± 0.35

0.879

  1. Comparison of subcutaenous fat depth (cm) between devices. MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; US, ultrasound; SD, standard deviation; ICC, intraclass coefficient; d, mean difference; n, number of participants.
Back to article page