1 / 11

The Girth Measurement Fallacy

The Girth Measurement Fallacy. Allan Mayrer Tom Norris Al Renner Edward Taylor. Review of Relevant Literature . Skinfold (hand calipers) vs. Bioelectrical impedance

pearly
Download Presentation

The Girth Measurement Fallacy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Girth Measurement Fallacy Allan Mayrer Tom Norris Al Renner Edward Taylor

  2. Review of Relevant Literature • Skinfold (hand calipers) vs. Bioelectrical impedance • Conclusion: Anthropometric method significantly underestimated and bioimpedance overestimated body fat compared to the deuteratedwater D2O method • Ultrasound portable (UT) device vs. Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DEXA) machine • Result: UT as accurate as DEXA; however, it costs less and is portable

  3. CBE vs. SBE • CBE (Circumference Based Equations ) • Considered acceptable; moderate correlation coefficient (r=.079) • Simple and low cost to administer • Limited ability to validly estimate body fat percentage • SBE (Skinfold Based Equations) • More valid and reliable results • Cost effective, yet more costly than CBE method • Impractical to train enough military personnel

  4. CBE vs. HW & BIA • CBE – Unacceptable error (4.7%) for college males • HW (Hydrostatic Weighing) • Thoroughly validated lab method • Requires trained personnel • Relies on specialized & costly equipment • BIA (Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis) • Acceptable error (2.1%) for college males • Relies on specialized & costly equipment

  5. Data Presentation • Review purpose of the research • Organizational problem hypothesis • Sub Questions • Benefits of Data • Know discharge costs associated with Body Fat % • May discover cheaper measuring method • May find more accurate methods, thus reducing costs of training and replacement (discharge costs) • Review the data collected • Where • Who authorized • Types of data collected

  6. Data Presentation (cont) • The data will be formatted from largest to smallest. • Give totals in two formats: • Grand Totals • Gender Totals • Types • Bar graph most appropriate

  7. Reasons Why Soldiers Discharged (TOTAL VIEW)

  8. Reasons Why Soldiers Discharged (GENDER VIEW)

  9. Data Presentation (cont) • Graphs will be in sequential order • Explain the process at required level of detail • Final Slides will have conclusions • Recommendations based on data

  10. Timeline • Data Collection (costs and methods) • 3 months • Army paperwork requests • 6 months • Army paperwork time frame • 15 years • Half before war started • Half after war began

  11. Timeline continued…… • Implementation • 1 year of final recommendation • 5 year nationwide (if recommended) • Revisiting issue • Every three years

More Related