ArticleJournal of health, population, and nutrition2025
The relationship between resting metabolic rate and hyperuricemia: is a higher metabolic rate better?
Article in Journal of health, population, and nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Basal metabolic rate, resting metabolic rate, and resting energy expenditure are frequently utilised for the same research aims, but the underlying mechanisms separating them from human metabolic rate and metabolic disease remain poorly understood.Furthermore, specific recommendations for the prevention and management of hyperuricemia in populations with different resting metabolic rates have not been proposed, or how to reduce the public health burden of hyperuricemia based on resting metabolic rate and other factors have not been explored.[Methods] From 2011 to 2018, we selected 3268 adult participants from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The modified Harris-Benedict equation was used to compute resting metabolic rate, and NHANES laboratory tests were used to acquire all biochemical parameters. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to look at the relationship between hyperuricemia and resting metabolic rate. [Results] The multifactorial corrected model's second through fourth quartiles of RMR levels compared to the first quartile had relative advantage ratios of 1.258 (0.883 to 1.793), P > 0.05, 1.569 (1.024 to 2.404), P < 0.05, and 2.570 (1.555 to 4.247), P < 0.001 for men, respectively, following analysis.Subgroups of sexes Following analysis, the relative advantage ratios for the second and third tertiles of RMR levels for males were 1.157 (0.712 to 1.880), P > 0.05, and 1.991 (1.187 to 3.338), P < 0.05, respectively, when compared to the first tertile in the multifactorial corrected model.The female subgroup's adjusted postmenopausal RMR levels had relative dominating ratios of 1.157 (0.767 to 1.743), P > 0.05; 1.683 (0.955 to 2.967), P > 0.05; and 2.140 (0.965 to 4.747), P > 0.05 for the second through fourth quartiles. For the second through fourth quartiles of adjusted postmenopausal RMR levels in the female subgroup, the relative dominance ratios were 1.186 (1.005 to 3.082), P < 0.05; 2.302 (1.043 to 5.081), P < 0.05; and 1.192 (0.792 to 1.794), P > 0.05.[Conclusion] There was a positive correlation between resting metabolic rate and hyperuricemia. This pattern was also shown when gender subgroups were examined, with women over 45 being particularly susceptible to the association between hyperuricemia and resting metabolic rate.
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.