Baseline characteristics
This study included 232 participants, comprising 129 (55.6%) in the Harmonious constitution group and 103 (44.4%) in the dampness constitution group (Table 1). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, sex, or grip strength (P > 0.05). However, significant differences were observed between the dampness constitution group and the Harmonious constitution group in body composition indicators. The dampness constitution group exhibited significantly higher values for TBW (p = 0.024), ICW (p = 0.033), and ECW (p = 0.015) compared with the Harmonious constitution group, indicating that individuals with the dampness constitution have a higher fluid content. Concurrently, the dampness constitution group exhibited significant increases in SMM (p = 0.032), SLM (p = 0.028), FFM (p = 0.026), and BCM (p = 0.033), suggesting a greater abundance of lean body mass. In addition, Protein (p = 0.032) and upper-arm muscle circumference (AMC; p = 0.044) were significantly higher in the dampness constitution group than in the harmonious constitution group. Furthermore, the BMR of the dampness constitution group was significantly elevated (p = 0.026), consistent with their higher levels of lean body mass. Regarding fat distribution, although there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of PBF and BMI, the VFA (p = 0.048) and abdominal circumference (p = 0.044) in the dampness constitution group were both significantly higher than those in the Harmonious constitution group, suggesting a characteristic tendency towards central fat distribution in the dampness constitution. It is worth noting that although ECW differed significantly between the two groups, the ECW/TBW ratio showed no statistically significant difference (p = 0.228), suggesting that the overall proportional structure of body fluid distribution was relatively stable. In the unadjusted descriptive comparison, no significant differences were found between the two groups regarding total and segmental bioimpedance and reactance values (e.g., Reactance_TR: 3.30 [3.00, 3.60] vs 3.30 [2.90, 3.70], p = 0.711). Notably, such univariate comparisons and the multivariable regression address different questions: a parameter may become significant after adjustment for covariates.
Feature selection and evaluation of predictive models based on LASSO regression
The cross-validation error curve and coefficient path plot for the LASSO regression are shown in Figure 1A,B. Under the λ.min criterion, the model ultimately identified five core features with non-zero regression coefficients (Table 2). The LASSO regression coefficients for each feature are as follows: PA_LL (coefficient = −0.315), Reactance_TR (coefficient = 0.291), ECW (coefficient = 0.185), PBF (coefficient = 0.018), and Mean_Grip (coefficient = 0.002). The predictive model constructed from these features yielded a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.657 (95% confidence interval: 0.587–0.727), indicating moderate discriminative power (Figure 2A). After bootstrap optimism correction (B = 1,000), the AUC was 0.607, and 5-fold cross-validation yielded an AUC of 0.585, suggesting a modest degree of overfitting optimism (Supplementary Table 1). Model calibration was adequate according to the Hosmer–Lemeshow test (χ2 = 8.882, df = 8, p = 0.352), although the bootstrap-corrected calibration slope of 0.696 suggested some optimism (Supplementary Table 1). VIF values for all predictors in the final model ranged from 1.55 to 3.77, indicating no problematic multicollinearity (Supplementary Table 2). In the decision curve analysis (Figure 2B), the model's net benefit curve lay above the 'treat none' reference line for threshold probabilities up to approximately 0.55, but remained below the 'treat all' reference line across the entire evaluated threshold probability range (0–1.0); above approximately 0.6, the model's net benefit fell below zero. These results indicate that the model's clinical utility is limited within this sample.
Factors independently associated with the dampness constitution: ECW and Reactance_TR
To further identify independent factors associated with the dampness constitution, this study incorporated the five core features identified by LASSO regression (ECW, PBF, PA_LL, Reactance_TR, and Mean_Grip), along with age and sex, into a multivariate logistic regression model. The results showed that ECW and Reactance_TR were independently associated with the dampness constitution (Table 3). Specifically, for every one litre increase in ECW, the odds of being classified as having the dampness constitution increased by 30.7% (OR = 1.307, 95% CI: 1.046–1.649, p = 0.021). Expressed per one standard deviation of ECW (2.14 L), the odds ratio was 1.774 (95% CI: 1.100–2.916). Reactance_TR also demonstrated a significant independent positive association (OR = 2.163, 95% CI: 1.124–4.267, p = 0.023). In contrast, PBF, PA_LL, and Mean_Grip did not reach statistical significance after adjusting for covariates (P > 0.05).
Sex-stratified analyses of independently associated factors
To investigate the stability of the aforementioned association indicators across sex subgroups, this study conducted multivariate logistic regression analyses stratified by sex. In the male subgroup, the independent associations of ECW and Reactance_TR were maintained. Specifically, the odds of the dampness constitution in men increased by 40.7% per one-unit increase in ECW (OR = 1.407, 95% CI: 1.030–1.974, p = 0.038); the OR for Reactance_TR was as high as 2.764 (95% CI: 1.140–7.255, p = 0.030). In contrast, PBF, PA_LL, and Mean_Grip remained non-statistically significant in the male subgroup (p > 0.05) (Table 4).
In the female subgroup, the associations were not statistically significant. Specifically, the effect of ECW was attenuated and no longer significant (OR = 1.353, 95% CI: 0.940–1.979, p = 0.108), the OR for Reactance_TR fell to 1.666 (95% CI: 0.578–4.960, p = 0.348), with neither reaching the statistical threshold. PBF, PA_LL, and Mean_Grip were also non-significant in the female subgroup (p > 0.05) (Table 5). However, formal interaction testing did not support a statistically significant difference between sexes (sex × ECW: OR = 1.127, 95% CI: 0.744–1.716, p = 0.573; sex × Reactance_TR: OR = 1.353, 95% CI: 0.428–4.282, p = 0.605), indicating that the apparent sex difference may reflect the smaller female subgroup and reduced statistical power rather than a true difference in the associations (Supplementary Table 3).
To assess the robustness of the above associations, this study conducted a sensitivity analysis. Following Winsorization, ECW still maintained an independent positive association with the dampness constitution (OR = 1.331, 95% CI: 1.055–1.694, p = 0.018), and the effect of Reactance_TR also remained statistically significant (OR = 2.321, 95% CI: 1.182–4.682, p = 0.016). In the winsorized analysis, PBF and PA_LL showed borderline P values (0.053 and 0.056) with effect estimates of OR = 1.054 (95% CI: 1.000–1.113) and OR = 0.592 (95% CI: 0.342–1.006), respectively (Table 6); after additional adjustment for waist-to-hip ratio, both reached nominal significance (PBF: OR = 1.086, 95% CI: 1.005–1.178, p = 0.040; PA_LL: OR = 0.574, 95% CI: 0.335–0.964, p = 0.039; Supplementary Table 4). These less stable results should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, the independent associations of ECW and Reactance_TR remained statistically significant after additional adjustment for waist-to-hip ratio or abdominal circumference in separate sensitivity analyses (Supplementary Tables 4 and 5). Taken together, the three sensitivity analyses showed that the independent associations of ECW and Reactance_TR remained statistically significant across all settings, with no change in direction or loss of significance after Winsorization of continuous variables or adjustment for additional potential confounding factors.
Data Availability:
All raw data and analyzed datasets generated during this study are publicly available in the Zenodo repository at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21187319.

Figure 1: Feature selection process for the LASSO regression model. (A) Error curves for the LASSO regression model based on 10-fold cross-validation. The x-axis represents the log(λ) values, and the y-axis represents the cross-validation error; vertical error bars represent the standard error of the cross-validation error (binomial deviance) across the 10 folds; the two vertical dotted lines indicate λ.min (the λ value corresponding to the minimum cross-validation error) and λ.1se (the λ value corresponding to the simplest model within one standard error of λ.min); features were selected using λ.min. (B) Coefficient path diagram of the LASSO regression model. The x-axis represents log(λ) values, and the y-axis represents the regression coefficients of each feature; as λ increases, the coefficients of irrelevant variables are gradually shrunk to 0, ultimately selecting five features with non-zero coefficient values under the λ.min criterion. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Assessment of the predictive model’s discriminatory power and clinical utility. (A) ROC curve. The model’s AUC was 0.657 (95% CI: 0.587–0.727). (B) DCA over the threshold probability range 0–1.0. The purple dashed line and the black dashed line represent the 'treat all' and 'treat none' reference strategies, respectively, and the green solid line represents the model. The model's net benefit curve lay above the 'treat none' reference line for threshold probabilities up to approximately 0.55 and fell below zero above approximately 0.6; it remained below the 'treat all' reference line throughout the entire range. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Table 1: Baseline characteristics of the study population stratified by constitution. Demographic, anthropometric, body composition, bioelectrical, and grip-strength characteristics are compared between participants with the Harmonious constitution and those with the dampness constitution. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation, median [interquartile range], or n (%), as appropriate. Abbreviations: TBW = total body water; ICW = intracellular water; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; BFM = body fat mass; VFA = visceral fat area; FMI = fat mass index; SMM = skeletal muscle mass; SLM = soft lean mass; FFM = fat-free mass; BCM = body cell mass; AMC = arm muscle circumference; BMR = basal metabolic rate; BMI = body mass index; WHR = waist-to-hip ratio; AC = abdominal circumference; PA = phase angle; IQR = interquartile range. Please click here to download this file.
Table 2: Key features selected by LASSO regression and their regression coefficients. Five features with non-zero coefficients were selected using the λ.min criterion in the LASSO regression analysis. Abbreviations: LASSO = least absolute shrinkage and selection operator; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength. Please click here to download this file.
Table 3: Multivariable logistic regression analysis of factors associated with the dampness constitution. The associations of the LASSO-selected features with the dampness constitution were evaluated after adjustment for age and sex. Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength. Please click here to download this file.
Table 4: Multivariable logistic regression analysis of factors associated with the dampness constitution in men. Associations between the selected features and the dampness constitution were evaluated in the male subgroup after adjustment for age.
Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength. Please click here to download this file.
Table 5: Multivariable logistic regression analysis of factors associated with the dampness constitution in women. Associations between the selected features and the dampness constitution were evaluated in the female subgroup after adjustment for age.
Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength. Please click here to download this file.
Table 6: Multivariable logistic regression analysis following Winsorization. Sensitivity analysis evaluated factors associated with the dampness constitution after applying 1% and 99% Winsorization to continuous variables. Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength. Please click here to download this file.
Supplementary Table 1: Internal validation and calibration of the final multivariable logistic regression model. Model performance was evaluated using apparent and optimism-corrected discrimination, 5-fold cross-validation, goodness-of-fit testing, and bootstrap calibration. The ECW association per one standard deviation is also reported.
Abbreviations: AUC, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve; CI = confidence interval; ECW, extracellular water; OR, odds ratio; df, degrees of freedom.Please click here to download this file.
Supplementary Table 2: Variance inflation factors for predictors in the final multivariable logistic regression model. Variance inflation factors were calculated to assess multicollinearity among predictors included in the final model.
Abbreviations: VIF = variance inflation factor; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength.Please click here to download this file.
Supplementary Table 3: Interaction of sex with extracellular water and trunk reactance for the dampness constitution. Interaction terms were evaluated to determine whether the associations of extracellular water and trunk reactance with the dampness constitution differed by sex.
Abbreviations: ECW = extracellular water; OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; LRT = likelihood ratio test; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance.Please click here to download this file.
Supplementary Table 4: Multivariable logistic regression analysis after adjustment for waist-to-hip ratio. Sensitivity analysis evaluated the associations of the selected features with the dampness constitution after additional adjustment for waist-to-hip ratio.
Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength; WHR = waist-to-hip ratio.Please click here to download this file.
Supplementary Table 5: Multivariable logistic regression analysis after adjustment for abdominal circumference. Sensitivity analysis evaluated the associations of the selected features with the dampness constitution after additional adjustment for abdominal circumference.
Abbreviations: OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval; ECW = extracellular water; PBF = percentage of body fat; PA_LL = left lower limb phase angle; Reactance_TR = trunk reactance; Mean_Grip = mean grip strength.Please click here to download this file.