CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 237

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validation of several established equations for resting metabolic rate in obese and nonobese people

Frankenfield, David C., Rowe, William A., Smith, J.Stanley, Cooney, R.N.·2003·Journal of the American Dietetic Association
DOI 10.1016/s0002-8223(03)00982-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective To evaluate several equations for predicting resting metabolic rate against measured values in obese and nonobese people. Design Resting metabolic rate was measured with indirect calorimetry. Four calculation standards using various combinations of weight, height, and age were used to predict resting metabolic rate: a) Harris-Benedict equation, b) Harris-Benedict equation using adjusted body weight in obese individuals, c) Owen, and d) Mifflin. Main outcome was percentage of subjects whose calculated metabolic rate was outside a +/-10% limit from measured values. Subjects/Setting 130 nonhospitalized adult volunteers grouped by degree of obesity (range of body mass index, 18.8 to 96.8). Statistical Analysis Performed Analysis of proportions was used to determine differences in the percentage of subjects estimated accurately by each equation; alpha was set at 0.05. Results Calculated resting metabolic rate was more than 10% different from measured in 22% of subjects using the Mifflin equation, 33% using the Harris-Benedict equation (P=.05 vs Mifflin), and 35% using the Owen equation (P Applications/conclusion Of the calculation standards tested, the Mifflin standard provided an accurate estimate of actual resting metabolic rate in the largest percentage of nonobese and obese individuals and therefore deserves consideration as the standard for calculating resting metabolic rate in obese and nonobese adults. Use of adjusted body weight in the Harris-Benedict equation le…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0002-8223(03)00982-9

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The Mifflin-St. Jeor equations that the Fitbit Surge relies on include height, weight, and age in their calculation of kilocalorie expenditure, while the authors' model only considers weight.

    “The Mifflin-St. Jeor equations that the Fitbit® Surge relies on include height, weight, and age in their calculation of kilocalorie expenditure [19,20] while our model only considers weight.”

    From Testing least cost path (LCP) models for travel time and kilocalorie expenditure: Implications for landscape genomics (2020) · cites this paper as [20]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Gephart, 1915, The determination of the basal metabolism of normal men and the effect of food, Arch Intern Med, 15, 835, 10.1001/archinte.1915.00070240044004 · DOI
  2. Boothby, 1936, Studies of the energy of metabolism of normal individuals, Am J Physiol, 116, 468, 10.1152/ajplegacy.1936.116.2.468 · DOI
  3. Robertson, 1952, Standards for the basal metabolism of normal people in Britain, Lancet, 1, 940, 10.1016/S0140-6736(52)90543-6 · DOI
  4. Cunningham, 1980, A reanalysis of the factors influencing basal metabolic rate in normal adults, Am J Clin Nutr, 33, 2372, 10.1093/ajcn/33.11.2372 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Owen, 1986, A reappraisal of caloric requirements in healthy women, Am J Clin Nutr, 44, 1, 10.1093/ajcn/44.1.1 · DOI
  6. Owen, 1987, A reappraisal of caloric requirements of men, Am J Clin Nutr, 46, 75, 10.1093/ajcn/46.6.875 · DOI
  7. Van der Ploeg, 2001, Predicting the resting metabolic rate of young Australian males, Eur J Clin Nutr, 55, 145, 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601125 · DOI
  8. Pavlou, 1986, Resting energy expenditure in moderate obesity. Predicting velocity of weight loss, Ann Surg, 203, 136, 10.1097/00000658-198602000-00005 · DOI
  9. Daly, 1985, Human energy requirements, Am J Clin Nutr, 42, 1170, 10.1093/ajcn/42.6.1170 · DOI
  10. Frankenfield, 1998, The Harris-Benedict studies of human basal metabolism, J Am Diet Assoc, 98, 439, 10.1016/S0002-8223(98)00100-X · DOI
  11. Petros, 2001, Validity of an abbreviated indirect calorimetry protocol for measurement of resting energy expenditure in mechanically ventilated and spontaneously breathing critically ill patients, Inten Care Med, 27, 1164, 10.1007/s001340100941 · DOI
  12. Frankenfield, 1996, Validation of a 5-minute steady state indirect calorimetry protocol for resting energy expenditure in critically ill patients, J Am Coll Nutr, 15, 397, 10.1080/07315724.1996.10718615 · DOI
  13. Webster, 1984, The composition of excess weight in obese women estimated by body density, total body water, and total body potassium, Hum Nutr Clin Nutr, 38, 299
  14. Glynn, 1999, Predictive versus measured energy expenditure using limits-of-agreement analysis in hospitalized, obese patients, JPEN J Paren Enteral Nutr, 23, 147, 10.1177/0148607199023003147 · DOI
  15. Garrel, 1996, Should we still use the Harris-Benedict equations?, Nutr Clin Pract, 11, 99, 10.1177/011542659601100399 · DOI
  16. Feurer, 1983, Resting energy expenditure in morbid obesity, Ann Surg, 197, 17, 10.1097/00000658-198301001-00003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Frankenfield, D. C., Rowe, W. A., Smith, J. S., & Cooney, R. N.
Venue
Journal of the American Dietetic Association
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2003-09
Volume
103
Issue
9
Pages
1152-1159
ISSN
0002-8223
DOI
10.1016/s0002-8223(03)00982-9
Cited by
237
References
2
Language
en
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review