This study reports the validity of body fat percentage (BF%) estimates from several commonly employed techniques as compared with a five-component (5C) model criterion. Healthy adults (n 170) were assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), multiple bioimpedance techniques and optical scanning. Output was also used to produce a criterion 5C model, multiple variants of three- and four-component models (3C; 4C) and anthropometry-based BF% estimates. Linear regression, Bland–Altman analysis and equivalence testing were performed alongside evaluation of the constant error (CE), total error (TE), se of the estimate (SEE) and coefficient of determination (R2). The major findings were (1) differences between 5C, 4C and 3C models utilising the same body volume (BV) and total body water (TBW) estimates are negligible (CE ≤ 0·2 %; SEE < 0·5 %; TE ≤ 0·5 %; R2 1·00; 95 % limits of agreement (LOA) ≤ 0·9 %); (2) moderate errors from alternate TBW or BV estimates in multi-component models were observed (CE ≤ 1·3 %; SEE ≤ 2·1 %; TE ≤ 2·2 %; R2 ≥ 0·95; 95 % LOA ≤ 4·2 %); (3) small differences between alternate DXA (i.e. tissue v. region) and ADP (i.e. Siri v. Brozek equations) estimates were observed, and both techniques generally performed well (CE < 3·0 %; SEE ≤ 2·3 %; TE ≤ 3·6 %; R2 ≥ 0·88; 95 % LOA ≤ 4·8 %); (4) bioimpedance technologies performed well but exhibited larger individual-level errors (CE < 1·0 %; SEE ≤ 3·1 %; TE ≤ 3·3 %; R2 ≥ 0·94; 95 % LOA ≤ 6·2 %) and (5) anthropometric equations generally performed poorly (CE 0·6– 5·7 %; SEE ≤ 5·1 %; TE ≤ 7·4 %; R2 ≥ 0·67; 95 % LOA ≤ 10·6 %). Collectively, the data presented in this manuscript can aid researchers and clinicians in selecting an appropriate body composition assessment method and understanding the associated errors when compared with a reference multi-component model.

The purpose of the present study was: (1) to develop a new dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)-derived body volume (BV) equation with the GE-Lunar prodigy while utilising underwater weighing (UWW) as a criterion and (2) to cross-validate the novel DXA-derived BV equation (4C-DXANickerson), Wilson DXA-derived BV equation (4C-DXAWilson) and air displacement plethysmography (ADP)-derived BV (4C-ADP) in Hispanic adults. A total of 191 Hispanic adults (18–45 years) participated in the present study. The development sample consisted of 120 females and males (50 % females), whereas the cross-validation sample comprised of forty-one females and thirty males (n 71). Criterion body fat percentage (BF %) and fat-free mass (FFM) were determined using a four-compartment (4C) model with UWW as a criterion for BV (4C-UWW). 4C-DXANickerson, 4C-DXAWilson and 4C-ADP were compared against 4C-UWW in the cross-validation sample. 4C-DXANickerson, 4C-DXAWilson and 4C-ADP all produced similar validity statistics when compared with 4C-UWW in Hispanic males (all P > 0·05). 4C-DXANickerson also yielded similar BF % and FFM values as 4C-UWW when evaluating the mean differences (constant error (CE)) in Hispanic females (CE = –0·79 % and 0·38 kg; P = 0·060 and 0·174, respectively). However, 4C-DXAWilson produced significantly different BF % and FFM values (CE = 3·22 % and –2·20 kg, respectively; both P < 0·001). Additionally, 4C-DXAWilson yielded significant proportional bias when estimating BF % (P < 0·001), whereas 4C-ADP produced significant proportional bias for BF % and FFM (both P < 0·05) when evaluated in Hispanic females. The present study findings demonstrate that 4C-DXANickerson is a valid measure of BV in Hispanics and is recommended for use in clinics, where DXA is the main body composition assessment technique.