Diagnostic Accuracy of Body Mass Index, Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis, and Waist-to-Hip Ratio Against DEXA for Obesity in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Read full text
Authors: Haifa F. Alotaibi, Saleh A. Alqahtani, Alanoud Alfraidi, Jamala Saleh Selan, Feras Altunusi, Abdulrahman A. Albatly, Shadan AlMuhaidib, Hanan Taib, Amr A. Arafat, Waleed A. Alhazzani
Cited by: 1
References: 31

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Body mass index (BMI) is the most widely used measure for obesity classification, yet it does not directly measure body fat and may substantially underestimate obesity prevalence. Simultaneous evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), BMI, and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) against dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) for obesity classification is lacking in Saudi Arabia. We aimed to quantify the diagnostic performance of these three surrogate measures against DEXA in Saudi adults. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional diagnostic accuracy study reported according to the STARD guideline at Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. We enrolled a convenience sample of 399 adults aged 18–65 years recruited from primary health care and outpatient clinic waiting areas. Each participant underwent InBody 770 BIA, anthropometric measurements (BMI, WHR), and DEXA (Lunar iDXA, GE) on the same day. We evaluated BIA body fat percentage against DEXA body fat percentage, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 against DEXA body fat percentage and fat mass index (FMI)-defined obesity, and WHR against the DEXA android-to-gynoid ratio. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, likelihood ratios, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), overall and stratified by sex. Results: DEXA classified 86.0% of participants as having obesity, compared with 62.9% by BIA and 24.8% by BMI; against DEXA body fat percentage, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 had a sensitivity of 28.9% and specificity of 100%. When FMI replaced body fat percentage as the reference standard, BMI sensitivity increased to 68.5% (specificity 97.3%, AUC 0.95). BIA achieved a sensitivity of 72.3%, specificity of 94.4%, and AUC of 0.86. WHR had the lowest sensitivity for central obesity (54.0%, specificity 94.8%, AUC 0.80). BIA showed the strongest correlation with DEXA body fat percentage (Spearman ρ = 0.82), followed by BMI (ρ = 0.60). Conclusions: BMI alone missed two-thirds of participants with DEXA-defined obesity in this Saudi adult cohort. Although BIA was more sensitive, it still missed 27.7% of individuals with DEXA-defined obesity. These findings support integrating body composition assessment into clinical practice and suggest that national obesity prevalence estimates based on BMI alone substantially underestimate the true burden.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Body Composition Measurement Techniques Nutrition and Health in Aging Diabetes Cardiovascular Risks and Lipoproteins

Publication details

Journal / source
Diagnostics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Volume
16
Issue
15
Pages
2457–2457
Publication date
4 August 2026
Language
EN