Correction: Min, J.-Y.; Min, K.-B. Comparisons of Two Bioelectrical Impedance Devices and Manual versus Sensor-Based Short Physical Performance Batteries for Assessment of Muscle Mass and Physical Performance. Sensors 2023, 23, 6026
Jin-Young Min, Kyoung-Bok Min
Abstract
Genes, proteins, chemicals, diseases, species, mutations and cell lines named across the full text — each resolved to its canonical identifier and authoritative record.
| Variables | Mean ± SD |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 74.49 ± 3.57 |
| Male, | 26 (65.00%) |
| Weight (kg) | 63.49 ± 9.40 |
| Height (cm) | 162.02 ± 7.28 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 24.15 ± 2.99 |
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsBody Composition Measurement Techniques · Nutrition and Health in Aging · Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Text Correction
There were five errors in the original article [1].
In Abstract, instead of “Forty-one older adults were measured for ASM and physical performance with two BIA devices”, it should read: “Forty older adults were measured for ASM and physical performance with two BIA devices”.Section 2.1, Study Population, Paragraph 1, instead of “Forty-one individuals (men (n = 27) and women (n = 14)) volunteered”, it should read: “Forty individuals (men (n = 26) and women (n = 14)) volunteered”.Section 2.1, Study Population, Paragraph 3, and Institutional Review Board Statement section, instead of “All procedures used in this study were approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB no. BOHUN 2023-01-066)”, it should read: “(IRB no. BOHUN 2023-02-014)”.Section 2.4, Statistical Analysis, Paragraph 1, instead of “We had recruited 41 participants with an anticipated dropout rate of 15%”, it should read: “We had recruited 40 participants with an anticipated dropout rate of 11%”.There was a mistake in the published version of Table 1. The number of study population should be “40” instead of “41”. The mean + SD for the males should be “26 (65.00%)” instead of “27 (65.85%)”.
Table 1: Characteristics of the study population (n = 40).
<table><thead><tr><th align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Variables</th><th align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Mean ± SD</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Age (years)</td><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">74.49 ± 3.57</td></tr><tr><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Male, <italic>n</italic> (%)</td><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">26 (65.00%)</td></tr><tr><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Weight (kg)</td><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">63.49 ± 9.40</td></tr><tr><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Height (cm)</td><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">162.02 ± 7.28</td></tr><tr><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">Body mass index (kg/m<sup>2</sup>)</td><td align="center" rowspan="1" colspan="1">24.15 ± 2.99</td></tr></tbody></table>The authors apologize for any convenience caused and state that the scientific conclusions are unaffected. This correction was approved by the Academic Editor. The original article has been updated.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.