Validity of predictive equations to estimate RMR in females with varying BMI

Thom, G. , Gerasimidis, K. , Rizou, E., Alfheeaid, H. , Barwell, N., Manthou, E., Fatima, S., Gill, J. M.R. , Lean, M. E.J. and Malkova, D. (2020) Validity of predictive equations to estimate RMR in females with varying BMI. Journal of Nutritional Science, 9, e17. (doi: 10.1017/jns.2020.11)

[img]
Preview
Text
215397.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

1MB

Abstract

Estimation of RMR using prediction equations is the basis for calculating energy requirements. In the present study, RMR was predicted by Harris–Benedict, Schofield, Henry, Mifflin–St Jeor and Owen equations and measured by indirect calorimetry in 125 healthy adult women of varying BMI (17–44 kg/m2). Agreement between methods was assessed by Bland–Altman analyses and each equation was assessed for accuracy by calculating the percentage of individuals predicted within ± 10 % of measured RMR. Slopes and intercepts of bias as a function of average RMR (mean of predicted and measured RMR) were calculated by regression analyses. Predictors of equation bias were investigated using univariate and multivariate linear regression. At group level, bias (the difference between predicted and measured RMR) was not different from zero only for Mifflin–St Jeor (0 (sd 153) kcal/d (0 (sd 640) kJ/d)) and Henry (8 (sd 163) kcal/d (33 (sd 682) kJ/d)) equations. Mifflin–St Jeor and Henry equations were most accurate at the individual level and predicted RMR within 10 % of measured RMR in 71 and 66 % of participants, respectively. For all equations, limits of agreement were wide, slopes of bias were negative, and intercepts of bias were positive and significantly (P < 0⋅05) different from zero. Increasing age, height and BMI were associated with underestimation of RMR, but collectively these variables explained only 15 % of the variance in estimation bias. Overall accuracy of equations for prediction of RMR is low at the individual level, particularly in women with low and high RMR. The Mifflin–St Jeor equation was the most accurate for this dataset, but prediction errors were still observed in about one-third of participants.

Item Type:Articles
Status:Published
Refereed:Yes
Glasgow Author(s) Enlighten ID:Malkova, Dr Dalia and Lean, Professor Michael and Gill, Professor Jason and Alfheeaid, Dr Hani and Rizou, Miss Eleni and Barwell, Dr Nicholas and Thom, Mr George and Manthou, Ms Eirini and Gerasimidis, Professor Konstantinos
Authors: Thom, G., Gerasimidis, K., Rizou, E., Alfheeaid, H., Barwell, N., Manthou, E., Fatima, S., Gill, J. M.R., Lean, M. E.J., and Malkova, D.
College/School:College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing
Journal Name:Journal of Nutritional Science
Publisher:Cambridge University Press
ISSN:2048-6790
ISSN (Online):2048-6790
Published Online:26 May 2020
Copyright Holders:Copyright © The Author(s), 2020
First Published:First published in Journal of Nutritional Science 9:e17
Publisher Policy:Reproduced under a Creative Commons license

University Staff: Request a correction | Enlighten Editors: Update this record