Reliability of Air Displacement Plethysmography in a Large, Heterogeneous Sample
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Several studies have assessed the validity of air displacement plethysmography (ADP), but few have assessed the reliability of ADP using a large, heterogeneous sample. PURPOSE: This study was conducted to determine the reliability of ADP using the Bod Pod in a large, heterogeneous sample. METHODS: A total of 980 healthy men and women (30 +/- 15 yr, mean +/- SD) completed two body composition assessments separated by 15-30 min. All testing was done in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. RESULTS: A significant correlation (r = 0.992, P = 0.001) was found between body density (BD) 1 (1.046 +/- 0.001 kg.L(-1); mean +/- SEM) and BD 2 (1.046 +/- 0.001 kg.L(-1). A paired t-test revealed no significant difference between BD 1 and 2 (P = 0.935). The coefficient of variation (CV) for BD was 0.15%. A significant intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was found for BD (ICC = 0.996, P = 0.001), and the standard error of measurement (SEM) was 0.001 kg.L(-1). Body mass (BM) 1 and 2 were correlated significantly (r = 0.999, P = 0.001); however, a significant (P = 0.001) decrease was seen from BM 1 (75.510 +/- 0.461 kg) to BM 2 (75.497 +/- 0.461 kg). Body volume (BV) tended to decrease (P = 0.08) from BV 1 (69.900 +/- 0.449 L) to BV 2 (69.884 +/- 0.449 L). CONCLUSION: ADP using the Bod Pod appears to assess BD reliably; however, the observed CV suggests that multiple trials are necessary to detect small treatment effects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it