1 of 12

Prism Labs:

Validation methods & benchmarks

Intro

1

Proprietary and Confidential

2 of 12

How do we validate our methods at Prism?

Prism continuously improves its estimation methods by running clinical studies.

Prism has partnered with Energy Balance & Body Composition Laboratory at the Texas Tech University.

The most recent study (Fall ‘22/Spring ‘23) had over 60 subjects scanned an iPhone for body composition and body measurements against high-cost high-value commercially available solutions.

2

Proprietary and Confidential

3 of 12

Validation Summary

Prism is the singular mobile-based 3D body reconstruction solution in the market that has undergone clinical validation to affirm its accuracy and precision, employing a true 3D body reconstruction method:

  • Our results are highly accurate against gold standards and consistent from scan to scan.
  • We display trends that are actionable for both circumferences and body fat %.

3

Proprietary and Confidential

4 of 12

Body Composition Benchmark for iPhone Body Scans

4

What is our body composition accuracy against GE DXA scans?

Absolute error�(unsigned)

iPhone Body Fat against GE DXA

Ideal Target

Median

3.96 %

< 5 %

Absolute error�(unsigned)

iPhone Body Fat %

Ideal Target

Median

0.3 %

< 1 %

What is the consistency of our body composition estimates when done back-to-back?

Research Publications

  • Check out the latest peer-reviewed publication validating our single camera scanning technology published on the Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

  • Request via email our white paper on accuracy and consistency.

Data from 60 subjects across full range of BMI classes.

Proprietary and Confidential

5 of 12

Body Circumference Measurements Benchmark for iPhone Body Scans

5

Relative error

iPhone body circumferences

Ideal Target

Median

0.41 %

< 1 %

Relative error

iPhone circumferences vs Naked Mirror

Ideal Target

Median

2.20 %

< 5%

What is our body measurements accuracy against the Naked Labs Body Scanner?

What is the consistency of our body measurements when done back-to-back?

Research Publications

  • Check out the latest peer-reviewed publication validating our single camera scanning technology published on the Clinical Nutrition Open Science.

  • Request via email our white paper on accuracy and consistency.

Data from 60 subjects across full range of BMI classes.

Proprietary and Confidential

6 of 12

iPhone results lead the way in terms of precision

6

Precision across different body composition methods

Fat Mass (lbs)

Lean Mass (lbs)

Prism iPhone scanner

0.72

0.72

*Skinfolds

1.28

1.24

*DXA

1.45

1.35

*Bod Pod

3.18

3.19

*BIA

5.13

5.00

Measurements precision for different 3D body scanners

Std. Error

(inch)

Std. Error

(%)

Prism iPhone scanner

0.0834

0.41

SizeStream

0.1290

0.63

Styku

0.1387

0.73

*Errors reported from previously published studies, ranging from 1.24-5.13 lbs of fat & lean mass (Ava Farley, 2020) (Adam J Zemski, 2018) (Timothy R. Ackland, 2012).

Proprietary and Confidential

7 of 12

Studies Summary

7

Study

Highlights

(2024) Accuracy of body composition against DXA

  • Study completed and new methods improved accuracy against DXA. Two articles in preparation for submission to scientific journals in Q2 2024, one on body composition accuracy and other on anthropometry accuracy.

(2024) Precision Validation of Prism Mobile Scanning Tech

  • Published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
  • New mobile scanning method as precise as large and expensive multi-camera 3D scanners.

(2023) Precision and Accuracy Validation of Prism Mobile Scanning Tech

  • White paper available here.
  • Prism’s iPhone scanning tech was found to have superior precision than other systems, and good accuracy to DXA.

(2023) Precision Validation of Single Camera Non-rigid Scanner

  • Published in the Clinical Nutrition Open Science Journal.
  • New method more precise than multi-camera 3D scanners.

(2020) Validation of 3 Commercial Body Scanners vs Prism Gen 1

  • Published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
  • Precise anthropometric estimates were found.

(2019) Accuracy & Precision of Prism Gen 1 scanner

  • Published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
  • Good correlations between tape vs anthropometric measurements and bf% vs DXA were found, with no significant bias.

Back to key highlights

Proprietary and Confidential

8 of 12

Body Composition Methodologies

8

Body Scanning

Bioimpedance (BIA)

Dexa (DXA)

Volume-based Methods

Methodology

Depth and/or RGB Camera

Electrical Currents

X-Ray Imaging

Water and Air Displacement

Safe while pregnant

No need for fasting or dietary restrictions

Takes less than a minute

Consistent Body Fat (BF) Readings

3D Visualization with Before/After

Body Dimensions & Circumferences

Proprietary and Confidential

9 of 12

Low end photo-based mobile body scanning

Mobile-based scanning solutions

Existing solutions in the market (Spren, Bodygram, SizeStream/MeThreeSixty, myBVI, Lean Screen…) only perform photo-based scans and use statistical models to provide body insights. Prism uses a 10 second full video spin of the user per scan and does a true personal 3D body reconstruction.

Typically take 2 to 4 photos of the user in different positions. Prism captures 75x more data per scan.

Goes beyond BF into circumferential measurements.

These solutions often lacks consistency of results, which means changes can get lost in the noise.

�The 3D scans are not personally accurate since only statistical models are used - the avatar is a generic representation that is fitted to the volume of the photos.

9

Halo

Bodygram

Proprietary and Confidential

10 of 12

Bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA)

Body fat (BF) accuracy: on average +/- 8 to 12 % BF deviation from DXA equivalents on BIA scales but significantly closer for higher-end InBody systems.

Highest penetration in gyms - Inbody

Relatively compact, quick, no moving parts

High end device lists for $27k, divides body into 5 sections

Withings scale is $60, one score, less accurate and consistent

Not very accurate, and very sensitive to external factors

Less accurate at higher body fat %

Hydration levels significantly impact score

Training intensity and recency impact score

10

Withings Scale

InBody System

Sources:

Proprietary and Confidential

11 of 12

Dexa (Dual Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry)

Gold standard for % BF, typically +/-1.5 to 2 % error.

You need a large X-Ray machine and a technician.

Takes about 20 min.

Average unit price is approximately $40,000.

A single scan can cost $125.

11

Sources:

  • Body Fat Series: Bioimpedance, March 2018 (link)

Proprietary and Confidential

12 of 12

Volume-based methods

Average accuracy at +/- 2 % BF, however more often it has more oscillations than hydrostatic that can go as high as +/- 10%.�

Typically done in a medical facility with need for a technician.�

Equipment costs around $30,000 and each analysis about $50.

Average accuracy between +/- 1.8 to 2.8 % BF.

You need a pool and a technician -> Large investment.

Time-consuming and causes discomfort to user.

Hydrostatic Weighing

Air Displacement Plethysmography (ADP)

12

Proprietary and Confidential