These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Validation of prediction equations for resting energy expenditure in Singaporean Chinese men.
    Author: Song T, Venkataraman K, Gluckman P, Seng CY, Meng KC, Khoo EY, Leow MK, Seng LY, Shyong TE.
    Journal: Obes Res Clin Pract; 2014; 8(3):e201-98. PubMed ID: 24847670.
    Abstract:
    Accurate prediction of resting energy expenditure (REE) is important in establishing adequate dietary intake goals for effective weight management. Previous studies have shown that the validity of an energy prediction equation may depend on the ethnicity of the population. Validation studies are lacking in the Singaporean Chinese population. A total of 96 healthy Singaporean Chinese males of age 21–40 years and body mass index (BMI) 18.5–30.0 kg/m2 participated in this study. REE was measured by indirect calorimetry and compared with REE predicted using existing equations. Validity was evaluated on the basis of mean bias and percentage of subjects predicted within ±10% of REE measured. In addition, Bland and Altman analyses were performed. No significant difference was observed between the mean levels of measured and predicted REE derived from the Owen equation. The Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization/United Nations University (FAO/WHO/UNU), Harris–Benedict and Mifflin equations significantly overestimated the mean measured REE by 7.5%, 6.0% and 2.4% respectively. Percentage of valid predictions for FAO/WHO/UNU, Harris–Benedict, Mifflin and Owen equations were 60%, 67%, 75% and 73% respectively. Bland and Altman analyses demonstrated poor agreement for all equations. The Owen equation provided a valid estimation of REE in Singaporean Chinese men at a group level. However, the individual errors of the equations were unacceptable high and may have limited utility in making clinical decisions on nutritional requirements.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]