Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30793166›Full record

Observational studyThe American journal of clinical nutrition2019

The use of whole body calorimetry to compare measured versus predicted energy expenditure in postpartum women.

Leticia C R Pereira, Sarah A Purcell, Sarah A Elliott, Linda J McCargar, Rhonda C Bell, Paula J Robson, Carla M Prado, ENRICH Study Team

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Leticia C R PereiraDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Sarah A PurcellDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Sarah A ElliottDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Linda J McCargarDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Rhonda C BellDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Paula J RobsonDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
Carla M PradoDepartment of Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Canada.
ENRICH Study Team
University of Alberta · CAAlberta Health Services · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccurate assessment of energy expenditure may support weight-management recommendations. Measuring energy expenditure for each postpartum woman is unfeasible; therefore, accurate predictive equations are needed.

objectivesThis study compared measured with predicted resting energy expenditure (REE) and total energy expenditure (TEE) in postpartum women.

methodsThis was a longitudinal observational study. REE was measured at 3 mo postpartum (n = 52) and 9 mo postpartum (n = 49), whereas TEE was measured once at 9 mo postpartum (n = 43) by whole body calorimetry (WBC). Measured REE (REEWBC) was compared with 17 predictive equations; measured TEE plus breast milk energy output (ERWBC) was compared with the estimated energy requirements/Dietary Reference Intakes equation (EERDRI). Fat and fat-free mass were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Group-level agreement was assessed by the Pearson correlation, paired t test, and Bland-Altman (bias) analyses. Individual-level accuracy was assessed with the use of Bland-Altman limits of agreement, and by the percentage of women with predicted energy expenditure within 10% of measured values ("accuracy").

resultsThe cohort was primarily Caucasian (90%). At a group level, the best equation predicting REEWBC was the DRI at 3 mo postpartum (-7 kcal, -0.1%; absolute and percentage bias, respectively), and the Harris-Benedict at 9 mo postpartum (-17 kcal, -0.5%). At an individual level, the Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization/United Nations University (FAO/WHO/UNU) height and weight equation was the most accurate at 3 mo postpartum (100% accuracy) and 9 mo postpartum (98% accuracy), with the smallest limits of agreement. Equations including body composition variables were not more accurate. Compared with ERWBC, EERDRI bias was -36 kcal, with inaccurate predictions in 33% of women.

conclusionsMany REE predictive equations were accurate for group assessment, with the FAO/WHO/UNU height and weight equation having the highest accuracy for individuals. EERDRI performed well at a group level, but inaccurately for 33% of women. A greater understanding of the physiology driving energy expenditure in the postpartum period is needed to better predict TEE and ultimately guide effective weight-management recommendations.

Indexed as

Energy MetabolismAdultBody CompositionCalorimetry, IndirectCohort StudiesFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesPostpartum Periodbody compositionbreast milk energy outputestimated energy requirementsindirect calorimetrylactationobesitypostpartum womenpredictive equationsresting energy expendituretotal energy expenditure

Identifiers

PMID30793166
PMCPMC6408201
OpenAlexW2917774735

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.