Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26109854›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2015

Predicting energy requirement with pedometer-determined physical-activity level in women with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Nighat Farooqi, Frode Slinde, Maine Carlsson, Lena Håglin, Thomas Sandström

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nighat FarooqiDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Frode SlindeDepartment of Internal Medicine and Clinical Nutrition, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Maine CarlssonDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Division of Geriatric Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Lena HåglinDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Division of Family Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Thomas SandströmDepartment of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Division of Respiratory Medicine and Allergy, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Umeå University · SEUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn clinical practice, in the absence of objective measures, simple methods to predict energy requirement in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) needs to be evaluated. The aim of the present study was to evaluate predicted energy requirement in females with COPD using pedometer-determined physical activity level (PAL) multiplied by resting metabolic rate (RMR) equations.

methodsEnergy requirement was predicted in 18 women with COPD using pedometer-determined PAL multiplied by six different RMR equations (Harris-Benedict; Schofield; World Health Organization; Moore; Nordic Nutrition Recommendations; Nordenson). Total energy expenditure (TEE) was measured by the criterion method: doubly labeled water. The predicted energy requirement was compared with measured TEE using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analyses.

resultsThe energy requirement predicted by pedometer-determined PAL multiplied by six different RMR equations was within a reasonable accuracy (±10%) of the measured TEE for all equations except one (Nordenson equation). The ICC values between the criterion method (TEE) and predicted energy requirement were: Harris-Benedict, ICC =0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23-0.89; Schofield, ICC =0.71, 95% CI 0.21-0.89; World Health Organization, ICC =0.74, 95% CI 0.33-0.90; Moore, ICC =0.69, 95% CI 0.21-0.88; Nordic Nutrition Recommendations, ICC =0.70, 95% CI 0.17-0.89; and Nordenson, ICC =0.40, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.77. Bland-Altman plots revealed no systematic bias for predicted energy requirement except for Nordenson estimates.

conclusionFor clinical purposes, in absence of objective methods such as doubly labeled water method and motion sensors, energy requirement can be predicted using pedometer-determined PAL and common RMR equations. However, for assessment of nutritional status and for the purpose of giving nutritional treatment, a clinical judgment is important regarding when to accept a predicted energy requirement both at individual and group levels.

Indexed as

Energy MetabolismModels, BiologicalMotor ActivityActigraphyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsCalorimetry, IndirectCross-Sectional StudiesEquipment DesignExercise ToleranceFemaleHumansMiddle AgedNutritional StatusDLW methodenergy expenditurepedometer-determined PALwomen with COPD

Identifiers

PMID26109854
PMCPMC4474393
OpenAlexW1670610117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.