Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26395435›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2016

Prediction of basal metabolic rate in patients with Prader-Willi syndrome.

S Lazzer, G Grugni, G Tringali, A Sartorio

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

S LazzerDepartment of Medical and Biological Sciences, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
G GrugniIstituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Experimental Laboratory for Auxo-Endocrinological Research, Piancavallo (VB), Italy.
G TringaliIstituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Experimental Laboratory for Auxo-Endocrinological Research, Piancavallo (VB), Italy.
A SartorioIstituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Experimental Laboratory for Auxo-Endocrinological Research, Piancavallo (VB), Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

objectivesThe objective of this study was to develop new equations for predicting basal metabolic rate (BMR) in Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) subjects and to compare their accuracy with commonly used equations developed by Lazzer (2007), Livingston (2005), Huang (2004), Nelson (1992), Mifflin (1990), Owen (1987), WHO (1985), Bernstein (1983) and Harris-Benedict (1919), using the Bland-Altman method. SUBJECTS/

methodsBMR was measured by indirect calorimetry and fat-free mass (FFM) and fat mass (FM) by a tetrapolar impedancemeter in 80 Caucasian PWS patients (mean body mass index: 39.1 kg/m(2); 17-50 years). Equations were derived by stepwise multiple regression analysis using a calibration group (n:50) and tested against the validation group (n:30).

resultsTwo new equations, based on anthropometric (BMR=body mass × 0.052+sex × 0.778-age × 0.033+2.839 (R(2)adj=0.61, s.e.=0.89 MJ per day)) or body composition (BMR=FFMx0.074+FMx0.042+sexx0.636-agex0.037+2.515 (R(2)adj=0.69, s.e.=0.82 MJ per day)), were generated. Predicted BMR (PBMR) was not significantly different from the measured BMR (<3.3%), and was accurate in 59% and 62% of patients, respectively. Nevertheless, significant magnitude bias was found for both equations (P<0.001, R(2)=0.36). The Owen (1987), Mifflin (1990), Huang (2004) and Lazzer (2007) equations showed mean differences <5% and PBMR was accurate in ~50% of patients. The Livingston (2005), WHO (1985) and Harris-Benedict (1919) equations showed a PBMR overestimation >7% and were accurate in <50% of patients. The Nelson (1992) and Bernstein (1983) equations showed a greater PBMR underestimation in >60% of subjects.

conclusionsThe new prediction equations showed significantly higher accuracy compared with equations tested, with exception of Lazzer (2007) and Livingston (2005) equations, and result in lower mean differences and lower limits of agreement compared with the equations tested.

Indexed as

Basal MetabolismAdolescentAdultBody CompositionBody Mass IndexCalorimetry, IndirectElectric ImpedanceFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalPrader-Willi SyndromePredictive Value of TestsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26395435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.