# Body Composition Analysis Methods in Adolescent Athletes: A Systematic Review

## TL;DR

This paper reviews methods for measuring body composition in adolescent athletes and finds that more accurate four-compartment models are preferable due to limitations in other techniques.

## Contribution

The paper systematically evaluates the reliability and validity of body composition methods in adolescent athletes and recommends four-compartment models for better accuracy.

## Key findings

- Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is considered the criterion standard for validating other methods.
- Two- and three-compartment models have reduced accuracy in adolescent athletes.
- Field methods like bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfolds need further validation.

## Abstract

Body composition analysis in adolescent athletes is critical for assessing fat
mass percentage and fat-free mass. However, measurement inaccuracies can
compromise results. Additionally, there is a lack of reliable reference methods
to evaluate the accuracy of field measurement techniques. This review evaluates
the reliability and validity of methods in adolescent athletes and provides
evidence-based recommendations for best practice. The search (Pubmed and Scopus)
followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses
guidelines and PICO criteria related to adolescent athletes in bioelectrical
impedance analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, air displacement
plethysmography and skinfold thickness measurements. Thirty-one studies out of
4,408 records met the eligibility criteria. Estimating fat mass percentage and
fat-free mass in adolescent athletes is moderately reliable and valid.
Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry is often regarded as the criterion standard
particularly for validating equations in bioelectrical impedance analysis and
skinfold measurements. Its assumptions regarding tissue density and confounding
factors limit precision. Air displacement plethysmography and hydrostatic
weighing are limited in athletes with extreme body mass or atypical fat
distribution. Recent calculation formulas validated for adolescents are rare and
inadequate for athletes. In summary, two- and three-compartment models reflect
reduced accuracy in adolescent athletes, making four-compartment models
preferable. Field methods like bioelectrical impedance analysis and skinfolds
require further validation due to the lack of reliable reference methods in this
specific population.