Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2011
A new method to estimate energy expenditure from abdominal and rib cage distances.
Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Energy expenditure estimation from respiration variables.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Estimation of respiratory volume from thoracoabdominal breathing distances: comparison of two models of machine learning.European journal of applied physiology · 2017Article
- Measurement of human energy expenditure, with particular reference to field studies: an historical perspective.European journal of applied physiology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to validate a new method of energy expenditure (EE) estimation stemming solely from the measurement of rib cage, abdominal and chest wall distances. We set out to prove that the variations of these distances, measured by two pairs of electromagnetic coils, lead to the estimation of the ventilation (VE) and the EE. Eleven subjects were recruited to take part in this study (27.6 ± 5.4 years; 73.7 ± 9.7 kg). Each subject participated in two tests. The objective of Test 1 was to determine the individual and group equations between the VE and EE during light to moderate activities while Test 2 compared the two pairs of electromagnetic coils with the indirect calorimetry so as to estimate EE in upright sitting and standing positions and during walking exercises. During Test 2, we compared EE measured by indirect calorimetry (EE(IC-Val-REF)) with EE estimated by the two pairs of electromagnetic coils through the application of: (1) the individual equation (EE(mag-Val-INDIV)) and (2) the group equation (EE(mag-val-GROUP)). The results show that there is no significant difference between EE(IC-Val-REF) and EE(mag-Val-INDIV) and between EE(IC-Val-REF) and EE(mag-val-GROUP) for each activity. Furthermore, the mean difference seems to show that the estimation of EE is better with the group equation. In conclusion, on the proven basis of this study we are able to validate this new method which permits the estimation of EE from abdominal and rib cage distances. This study also highlights the advantage of using a group equation to the estimate EE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21416146What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.