PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 17, 2026The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research0 citations

Agreement Between a Photograph-Based Five-Compartment Body Composition Model and a Three-Compartment Reference Among Trained Adults

View Full Paper
KLKworweinski LafontantSSSofea SmithJLJack Livingston

Key Points

  • This research aims to evaluate the agreement between a photograph-based five-compartment body composition model and a traditional three-compartment reference.
  • Sample included 52 trained adults participating in high intensity functional training, with both bioelectrical impedance and photogrammetry used for measurements.
  • Statistical analyses included Bland-Altman and concordance correlation coefficients with Bonferroni correction applied.
  • Bias calculations evaluated fat mass, fat-free mass, and body fat percentage with and without corrections.
  • With corrections, Bennett 5C underestimated fat mass (bias = 1.48 kg) and overestimated fat-free mass (bias = -1.48 kg) with significant differences (p ≤ 0.014).
  • Without corrections, Bennett 5C significantly differed from Siri 3C (p < 0.001) and some values were negative for four subjects.
  • Total body volume measurements showed high agreement with air displacement plethysmography (bias = 0.05 L, p = 0.763).

Abstract

Abstract Lafontant, K, Smith, S, Livingston, J, Gonzalez, C, Nguyen, NLN, Kampiyil, S, Da Silva Barbera, MA, Johnson, B, Stout, JR, and Fukuda, DH. Agreement between a photograph-based 5-compartment body composition model and a 3-compartment reference among trained adults. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000–000, 2026—Multi-compartment models are widely accepted as the current standard for body composition assessments, yet the need for laboratory-based tests can make these models inaccessible for practitioners. A multi-compartment model based on photogrammetry and bioelectrical impedance (Bennett 5C ) has recently been proposed, yet it has not been validated in another cohort. We assessed agreement between a Siri 3-compartment (Siri 3C ) reference and Bennett 5C with and without corrections for total body water (TBW; using bioelectrical impedance) and total body volume (TBV; using photogrammetry) in a sample of 52 adult high intensity functional training practitioners (men: n = 34, women: n = 18, age: 34.9 ± 11.2 years, BMI = 26.0 ± 3.5 kg/m 2 ). Bland-Altman analyses and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC) were used, with the Bonferroni-corrected alpha set at p < 0.017. With corrections, Bennett 5C tended to underestimate fat mass (bias = 1.48 kg), overestimate fat-free mass (bias = −1.48 kg), and underestimate body fat percentage (bias = 1.63%) at a statistically significant level ( p ≤ 0.014; CCC, 0.743–0.966) with wide limits of agreement. Without corrections, Bennett 5C significantly differed from Siri 3C ( p < 0.001; CCC, 0.395–0.856), and produced negative body composition values for 4 subjects. Corrected TBV had adequate agreement with the criterion measure of air displacement plethysmography (bias = 0.05 L; limits of agreement = −2.37, 2.48 L; CCC = 0.997; p = 0.763). When TBV and TBW estimates are corrected, practitioners can use Bennett 5C to estimate body composition within trained populations but should be wary of the wide limits of agreement and consider alternative equations.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Lafontant et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a095c2c7880e6d24efe2261https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000005538
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper