ArticleJournal of intellectual disability research : JIDR2025
A Comparison of Commonly Used Prediction Equations for Estimating Resting Metabolic Rate in Adults With Down Syndrome.
Article in Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Resting Energy Expenditure in Adults With Williams Syndrome: Comparative Accuracy of Predictive Equations.Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR · 2026Article
- Pilot evaluation of a dance-based physical activity program for adults with Down syndrome.Translational journal of the American College of Sports Medicine · 2026Article
- The promotion of physical activity for use in Alzheimer's disease prevention trials in adults with Down syndrome: Results from a 12-month randomized trial.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundResting metabolic rate (RMR), the energy required by the body at rest, is the largest part of total daily energy expenditure. Commonly used prediction equations may overestimate RMR in adults with Down syndrome (DS). The purpose of this study was to assess the equivalency of prediction equations for estimating RMR in adults with DS.
methodsTwenty-five adults with DS (24 ± 5 years of age, 64% female) completed RMR assessments at an academic medical centre in the United States between November 2021 and July 2023. Measured RMR (kilocalories per day) was compared to estimated RMR from eight prediction equations using a null hypothesis significance (i.e., a paired t-test) and equivalence (i.e., a two one-sided test) tests. Bland-Altman plots, Pearson correlations and linear regressions were used to evaluate the bias between the measured and predicted RMR values.
resultsMeasured RMR in adults with DS was 1090 ± 136 kcal/day. Prediction equations overestimated RMR by 8 ± 16% (76 ± 165 kcal/day) to 45 ± 16% (488 ± 165 kcal/day) except for the Bernstein fat-free mass equation which underestimated RMR by 0.2 ± 11.5% (8 ± 123 kcal/day) and was statistically equivalent to measured RMR in our sample (p = 0.027).
conclusionsThe Bernstein fat-free mass equation offers better accuracy in adults with DS than other RMR prediction equations, but the equation needs to be evaluated in larger, more diverse samples of adults with DS.
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.