Mean Expected Error in Prediction of Total Body Water: A True Accuracy Comparison between Bioimpedance Spectroscopy and Single Frequency Regression Equations

Table 6

Total body water predicted by different impedance methods according to sex.

Prediction method	Total body water
	Women		Men
	Volume (L)	Bias (L, %)	Volume (L)	Bias (L, %)
Reference method^2H2O dilution	33.59 ± 4.98		45.14 ± 8.52
50 kHz prediction methods
Deurenberg et al. [18]	35.24 ± 5.56	(+1.65, 4.91)	40.15 ± 8.27	(−4.99, −11.07)
Heitmann [19]	38.60 ± 5.46	(+5.01, 14.92)	43.22 ± 7.18	(−1.92, −4.25)
Kushner and Schoeller [20]	35.79 ± 4.46	(+2.2, 6.55)	48.18 ± 7.82	(+3.04, 6.71)
Sun et al. [21]	35.25 ± 5.11	(+1.66, 4.94)	47.53 ± 9.09	(+2.39, 5.27)
BIS prediction methods
Moissl et al. [24]	33.62 ± 4.61	(+0.03, 0.09)	44.11 ± 7.85	(−1.0, −2.21)
de Lorenzo et al. [22]	33.26 ± 5.72	(−0.33, −0.98)	43.92 ± 8.71	(−1.23, −2.72)