两种不同场地方法对年轻摔跤运动员体脂估计的比较

IF 0.2 Q4 SPORT SCIENCES Kinesiologia Slovenica Pub Date : 2023-04-13 DOI:10.52165/kinsi.29.1.64-72
M. Kutlu, E. Demirkan, C. Taşkıran, Mustafa Arici
{"title":"两种不同场地方法对年轻摔跤运动员体脂估计的比较","authors":"M. Kutlu, E. Demirkan, C. Taşkıran, Mustafa Arici","doi":"10.52165/kinsi.29.1.64-72","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Practical body composition equations developed up to now are open to testing on different groups of athletes. The purpose of the study was to compare the estimation of body composition with two different equations, using skinfold and body neck and waist circumference in young wrestlers. One hundred and ten wrestlers (age:14.5 ± 1.2 years) voluntarily participated in the study and were divided into two categories based on body weight percentile scores (thin and heavy). Body composition analyses were determined by using two field methods, one of these was the skinfold method including the abdomen, subscapular, and triceps regions, and the other method was the indirect body composition determination using waist, and neck circumferences using the equations. The results showed that there were significant differences between the calculation results of equations for both the thin group and also heavy group. However, while the rate of error difference in the calculations of the two equations obtained from skinfold and body circumference measurements was low in the heavy group (Standard error of mean (SEM) Range; 2.6 %BF – Difference 16.5%), it was significantly higher in the thin group (SEM Range; 4.7 %BF - Difference 51.6%). The Skinfold equation was significantly underestimated for both groups when compared to the circumferential equation results. The findings showed that the field methods used in this study could be insufficient and, misleading to determine the body composition of young candidate wrestlers.","PeriodicalId":43206,"journal":{"name":"Kinesiologia Slovenica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"THE COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED BODY FATNESS WITH TWO DIFFERENT FIELD METHODS IN YOUNG WRESTLERS\",\"authors\":\"M. Kutlu, E. Demirkan, C. Taşkıran, Mustafa Arici\",\"doi\":\"10.52165/kinsi.29.1.64-72\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Practical body composition equations developed up to now are open to testing on different groups of athletes. The purpose of the study was to compare the estimation of body composition with two different equations, using skinfold and body neck and waist circumference in young wrestlers. One hundred and ten wrestlers (age:14.5 ± 1.2 years) voluntarily participated in the study and were divided into two categories based on body weight percentile scores (thin and heavy). Body composition analyses were determined by using two field methods, one of these was the skinfold method including the abdomen, subscapular, and triceps regions, and the other method was the indirect body composition determination using waist, and neck circumferences using the equations. The results showed that there were significant differences between the calculation results of equations for both the thin group and also heavy group. However, while the rate of error difference in the calculations of the two equations obtained from skinfold and body circumference measurements was low in the heavy group (Standard error of mean (SEM) Range; 2.6 %BF – Difference 16.5%), it was significantly higher in the thin group (SEM Range; 4.7 %BF - Difference 51.6%). The Skinfold equation was significantly underestimated for both groups when compared to the circumferential equation results. The findings showed that the field methods used in this study could be insufficient and, misleading to determine the body composition of young candidate wrestlers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kinesiologia Slovenica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kinesiologia Slovenica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52165/kinsi.29.1.64-72\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kinesiologia Slovenica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52165/kinsi.29.1.64-72","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

到目前为止,实际的身体成分方程是开放的,可以在不同的运动员群体中进行测试。这项研究的目的是比较两种不同的方程对身体成分的估计,使用年轻摔跤运动员的皮肤褶皱和身体脖子和腰围。110名摔跤运动员(年龄:14.5±1.2岁)自愿参与研究,根据体重百分位数分为两类(瘦和重)。体成分分析采用两种场法,一种是皮褶法,包括腹部、肩胛骨下和肱三头肌区域,另一种是间接体成分法,使用方程计算腰围和颈围。结果表明,瘦组和重组的方程计算结果存在显著差异。然而,在体重较重的组中,由皮肤褶和体围测量得出的两个方程的计算误差差率很低(平均标准误差(SEM)范围;2.6% BF -差值16.5%),瘦组显著高于瘦组(SEM范围;4.7% BF -差值51.6%)。与周向方程的结果相比,两组的皮褶方程被显著低估。研究结果表明,在本研究中使用的现场方法可能是不充分的,并误导确定年轻候选摔跤手的身体组成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
THE COMPARISON OF ESTIMATED BODY FATNESS WITH TWO DIFFERENT FIELD METHODS IN YOUNG WRESTLERS
Practical body composition equations developed up to now are open to testing on different groups of athletes. The purpose of the study was to compare the estimation of body composition with two different equations, using skinfold and body neck and waist circumference in young wrestlers. One hundred and ten wrestlers (age:14.5 ± 1.2 years) voluntarily participated in the study and were divided into two categories based on body weight percentile scores (thin and heavy). Body composition analyses were determined by using two field methods, one of these was the skinfold method including the abdomen, subscapular, and triceps regions, and the other method was the indirect body composition determination using waist, and neck circumferences using the equations. The results showed that there were significant differences between the calculation results of equations for both the thin group and also heavy group. However, while the rate of error difference in the calculations of the two equations obtained from skinfold and body circumference measurements was low in the heavy group (Standard error of mean (SEM) Range; 2.6 %BF – Difference 16.5%), it was significantly higher in the thin group (SEM Range; 4.7 %BF - Difference 51.6%). The Skinfold equation was significantly underestimated for both groups when compared to the circumferential equation results. The findings showed that the field methods used in this study could be insufficient and, misleading to determine the body composition of young candidate wrestlers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Kinesiologia Slovenica
Kinesiologia Slovenica SPORT SCIENCES-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
RECOVERY PRACTICES OF SLOVENIAN SPORT CLIMBERS EFFECT OF MANIPULATION OF BASE OF SUPPORT ON CENTER OF PRESSURE: COMPARISON OF CHILDREN WITH AND WITHOUT INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY EXAMINING THE LINK BETWEEN MOTOR FITNESS AND MORPHOLOGY IN 10-YEAR-OLD CHILDREN COGNITIVE CHARACTERISTICS AND SOME FACTORS AFFECTING THE SPRINT AND MEMORY COURSE PERFORMANCE OF ORIENTEERS A COMPARISON OF REPEATED WINGATE BASED OF HIGH INTENSITY INTERVAL TRAINING AND MODERATE INTENSITY CONTINUOUS TRAINING ON AEROBIC CAPACITY UNDER NORMOBARIC HYPOXIA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1