The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

877 scale

Manufactured by Seca
Sourced in Germany

The Seca 877 scale is a medical-grade weighing device designed for clinical use. It features a large, easy-to-read display and a sturdy construction to ensure accurate and reliable measurements. The scale is capable of weighing individuals up to a specified maximum capacity.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

11 protocols using 877 scale

1

Measuring Generalized and Abdominal Adiposity

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Information on demographics and self-reported health were collected by self- or interviewer-administered questionnaire. Participants were physically examined, including measurements of weight, height and WC. Height (SECA 217 stadiometer) and weight (SECA 877 scale) were measured in light clothing, and BMI was calculated as weight/height2 (kg/m2). WC was measured in light clothing at the level midway between the lower rib margin and the iliac crest. Both generalized adiposity and abdominal adiposity were examined. Generalized adiposity was defined by BMI as this is the most wide-spread measure used to assess generalized adiposity. To facilitate interpretation for clinical practice, BMI was dichotomised into a binary generalized adiposity measure—obesity—defined as a BMI of ≥ 30.0 kg/m2 according to the World Health Organization (WHO) definition [24 ]. WC was used as measure for abdominal obesity and was dichotomised following WHO recommendations, i.e. abdominal obesity is WC ≥ 88 cm for women and ≥ 102 cm for men [25 ].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Anthropometric Measurements and Food Insecurity Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Weight (kg) and height (cm) of participants were measured in order to calculate body mass index: BMI = weight (kg)/(height [m])2. Weight was measured using the Seca 877 Scale (Seca, Hamburg, Germany) and recorded to the nearest 100 g. Women wore light clothing and removed shoes and heavy outerwear (e.g., sweaters) before obtaining weight. Height was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a single calibrated Holtain Stadiometer (Holtain Limited, Crymych, UK). Participants were measured either barefoot or wearing thin socks. Mid upper arm circumference (MUAC) was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a plastic measuring tape. Measurement was taken at the mid-point of the upper arm, between the acromion process and the tip of the olecranon. A MUAC ≤24 cm was used to define undernutrition [26 ]. A questionnaire was administered by a trained research assistant to assess socio-economic and demographic characteristics of the women. Food insecurity (hunger) was assessed by a shortened version of the Community Childhood Hunger Identification Project (CCHIP) Index [27 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
BIA measurements were conducted following the SOP for SF-BIA using a hand-to-foot Bodystat® 500 (Bodystat, UK) [5 ]. Before each BIA measurement, participants were asked to urinate, after which their weight (kg) was measured with one layer of clothing and without shoes on a Seca® 877 scale. A correction of 1 kg for clothes was applied. At each time point, the participant was measured three times consecutively to determine the variation within time points. We used the mean of the three measurements to calculate the additional variables. FFM and FM were calculated using the Kyle formula [3 (link)]. Afterwards, both FFM and FM were divided by squared height to obtain the index (kg/m2): FFM index (FFMI) and FM index (FMI).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Comprehensive Bariatric Surgery Outcome Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Demographic variables (gender, age at the time of surgery) and socioeconomics (education level, employment status, marital status) and medical history (weight, height, comorbidities, years with obesity, surgery type and complications during the 24 months after surgery) were collected from the hospital electronical medical records. Weight was measured using a Seca 877 scale at baseline (the day before surgery), and at scheduled appointments at the outpatient clinic at 12 and 24 months after surgery. Weight and height were measured with patients in a standing position wearing light clothing and no shoes.
Consenting patients received an email with a link to the online questionnaires. The study was explained one more time, vocally by another link in the email. The questionnaires were administered using Survey-Xact software (Ramboll Management Consulting). There were two email reminders, and non-responding patients received one telephone call.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Comprehensive Anthropometric Measurements for Body Composition

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Participants’ weight (kg, to the nearest 100 g) and height (cm, to the nearest 0.1 cm) were measured using the Seca 877 Scale (Seca) and Holtain Stadiometer (Holtain Limited). Measurements were performed in light clothing and without shoes or heavy outerwear. BMI was calculated as follows: weight (kg)/(height [m])2. Mid-upper arm circumference was measured to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring tape at the midpoint between the acromion process and the olecranon. Waist circumference was taken to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring tape at the midpoint between the lowest palpable rib and the top of the iliac crest. Each anthropometric measurement was taken in triplicate, and the average of all 3 measurements was used.
DXA (Hologic Inc) was used to determine fat and lean mass, analyzed as “whole body less head.” This method was chosen for consistency given that many young women wear hair weaves and beads that are not easily removed [18 (link)]. The scan was conducted by trained radiographers following daily quality control checks. Percent body fat was calculated using DXA-derived fat mass, in (kg/total body weight) × 100. FMI was calculated using fat mass (kg)/(height [m])2, which gives a superior estimate of body fat index than BMI because it distinguishes between lean and fat mass, unlike when using total body weight.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Socioeconomic Status and Childhood Obesity

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Parents completed a demographic questionnaire that included questions about their citizenship, monthly household income and composition, household size, highest level of education, occupational group, and time spent working per week. With this information, we calculated the weighted net equivalence income according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) scale [38 ] and socioeconomic status (SES), a multidimensional index computed as the sum score of points from the parental data [39 (link)]. With this information, a classification of low, medium, and high social status became possible.
Additionally, parents reported their body weight, body height, and age, as well as their child’s age. Parental BMI was categorized as follows: BMI ≥ 25.0 kg/m2 to 29.9 kg/m2 as overweight and BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 as obese. Trained study staff measured each participating child’s height and weight in the kindergarten classrooms using a calibrated SECA 877 scale and a portable stadiometer. Measurements were taken while the child was in light clothing and no shoes. Age-specific percentile values were calculated using the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) [40 ] guidelines. Children who had a BMI percentile between the 85th and 95th percentiles for age and sex, were classified as overweight, and those at, or above, the 95th percentile were classified as obese.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Smoking, Physical Activity, and Hypertension Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Smoking status was classified as non-smokers and current smokers. Physical activity was assessed using the Short Questionnaire to Assess Health-Enhancing Physical Activity (SQUASH) questionnaire [19 (link)] and was classified into 2 categories: achieving the international norm for recommended physical activity (at least 30 minutes of moderate- and high-intensity activity per day on at least 5 days per week) or not. Height was measured without shoes with a portable stadiometer (Seca 217) to the nearest 0.1 cm. Weight was measured in light clothing with a Seca 877 scale to the nearest 0.1 kg. Body mass index was calculated as weight (kg) divided by height squared (m2). Blood pressure (BP) was measured using a validated automated digital BP device (WatchBP Home; Microlife AG) on the left arm in a seated position after the person had been seated for at least 5 minutes. Both anthropometrics and BP were measured twice, and the mean of the 2 measurements was used in the analyses. Hypertension was defined as systolic BP ≥ 140 mmHg, and/or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg, and/or being on antihypertensive medication treatment, and/or self-reported hypertension.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Anthropometric and Blood Pressure Measurements

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure was measured sitting after 10 minutes of rest with a calibrated automated blood pressure monitor (Welch Allyn, Germany). Blood pressure was automatically measured three times by the monitor, and the average value of the two last measurements was used. Resting heart rate was measured, after 10 minutes of rest in supine position, using electrocardiogram. Height was measured to the nearest centimetre and body weight was measured to the nearest 0.1 kg using a Seca 877 scale (Seca Corp, Germany). Body mass index was calculated as body weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meter. Waist circumference was measured to the nearest half centimetre, using a measuring tape at the height of the umbilicus.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Anthropometric Measures for Health Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Anthropometrics are measured using standard procedures (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, III, 1988–94. National Center for Health Statistics, [37 ]). Both height (using the SECA 213 stadiometer) and weight (using the SECA 877 scale) are measured without shoes or heavy clothes to the nearest 1 mm and 0.1 kg respectively. Body Mass Index (BMI) is calculated as weight/height squared (kg/m2) and Z-scores from age- and sex specific reference values. The right arm, right wrist, waist and hip circumferences are recorded to the nearest 0.1 cm using a measuring tape.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Standardized Maternal Anthropometric Measurements

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A detailed manual with instructions for all adult measurement techniques, the methods for multicentre standardisation of those measures, and the procedures for the calibration and maintenance of equipment have been published elsewhere.33 (link)
34 (link)
35 All documentation, protocols, data collection forms, and electronic transfer strategies are available at www.intergrowth21.org. Briefly, the women’s height and weight were measured in duplicate with a Seca 264 stadiometer and Seca 877 scale (Seca, Germany), respectively, on study entry between 9 and 13+6 weeks’ gestation. A first trimester body mass index (BMI) was calculated and categorised as normal weight (18.50-24.99) or overweight (25.00-29.99), according to the WHO definition.36 The same standardised methods and clinical procedures were used to measure maternal weight every five weeks (plus/minus one week) until delivery, so that the possible ranges after recruitment in which weight was measured were 14-18, 19-23, 24-28, 29-33, 34-38, and 39-42 weeks’ gestation.35
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

About PubCompare

Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.

We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.

However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.

Ready to get started?

Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!