ArticleJournal of the American Dietetic Association2011
Energy prediction equations are inadequate for obese Hispanic youth.
Article in Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comparison of predictive equations and measured resting energy expenditure among obese youth attending a pediatric healthy weight clinic: one size does not fit all.Nutrition in clinical practice : official publication of the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition · 2013Article
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
Abstract
Assessing energy requirements is a fundamental activity in clinical dietetics practice. A study was designed to determine whether published linear regression equations were accurate for predicting resting energy expenditure (REE) in fasted Hispanic children with obesity (aged 7 to 15 years). REE was measured using indirect calorimetry; body composition was estimated with whole-body air displacement plethysmography. REE was predicted using four equations: Institute of Medicine for healthy-weight children (IOM-HW), IOM for overweight and obese children (IOM-OS), Harris-Benedict, and Schofield. Accuracy of the prediction was calculated as the absolute value of the difference between the measured and predicted REE divided by the measured REE, expressed as a percentage. Predicted values within 85% to 115% of measured were defined as accurate. Participants (n=58; 53% boys) were mean age 11.8±2.1 years, had 43.5%±5.1% body fat, and had a body mass index of 31.5±5.8 (98.6±1.1 body mass index percentile). Measured REE was 2,339±680 kcal/day; predicted REE was 1,815±401 kcal/day (IOM-HW), 1,794±311 kcal/day (IOM-OS), 1,151±300 kcal/day (Harris-Benedict), and, 1,771±316 kcal/day (Schofield). Measured REE adjusted for body weight averaged 32.0±8.4 kcal/kg/day (95% confidence interval 29.8 to 34.2). Published equations predicted REE within 15% accuracy for only 36% to 40% of 58 participants, except for Harris-Benedict, which did not achieve accuracy for any participant. The most frequently accurate values were obtained using IOM-HW, which predicted REE within 15% accuracy for 55% (17/31) of boys. Published equations did not accurately predict REE for youth in the study sample. Further studies are warranted to formulate accurate energy prediction equations for this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.