ArticleCurrent developments in nutrition2025
Comparison of Resting Energy Expenditure Prediction Equations and Indirect Calorimetry Among Adults with Severe Obesity.
Article in Current developments in nutrition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bias Characterization of Resting Energy Expenditure Prediction Equations in Japanese Subjects: A Pilot Exploratory Study.Nutrients · 2026Article
- [Resting Energy Expenditure Assessment in Adults with Obesity: Limitations of Commonly Used Predictive Equations].Problemy endokrinologii · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Proper estimations of resting energy expenditure (REE) are important for developing weight management strategies, but it is unclear which prediction equations best estimate REE for those with severe obesity. Objectives: This validation study tested 11 previously validated REE prediction equations to determine which equations estimate REE with the least bias and most precision in participants with severe obesity. Methods: REE was measured by indirect calorimetry in 632 females and 148 males with severe obesity from the Utah Obesity Study. A literature search was conducted to identify prediction equations designed from, validated, or commonly used in samples with severe obesity. All equations were tested on each participant. Equations were considered unbiased if mean predicted REE did not differ significantly ( Results: Only the body weight-based Lazzer equations (Lazzer A) and the Horie-Waitzberg equation generated unbiased predictions across all subgroups, with bias values ranging from -68.1 to 71.6 kcal, yet Bland-Altman plots revealed systematic bias, particularly at extreme values of REE. Equations including body composition did not predict better than body weight-based equations, and no single equation predicted best in every subgroup. Precision measurements never rose above 67.8%. Conclusions: Clinicians may benefit from tailoring their choice of REE prediction equation to the specific characteristics of each patient, favoring equations with lower bias and greater precision within relevant subgroups. However, because of the low precision of REE prediction equations and the systematic bias revealed at REE extremes, it is highly recommended to measure REE whenever possible.
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.