4.4 Article

Development and cross-validation of prediction equations for estimating resting energy expenditure in severely obese Caucasian children and adolescents

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
Volume 96, Issue 5, Pages 973-979

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/BJN20061941

Keywords

prediction equation; energy expenditure; children; adolescents; body composition; obesity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objectives of the present study were to develop and cross-validate new equations for predicting resting energy expenditure (REE) in severely obese children and adolescents, and to determine the accuracy of new equations using the Bland - Altman method. The subjects of the study were 574 obese Caucasian children and adolescents (mean BMI z-score 3(.)3). REE was determined by indirect calorimetry and body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis. Equations were derived by stepwise multiple regression analysis using a calibration cohort of 287 subjects and the equations were cross-validated in the remaining 287 subjects. Two new specific equations based on anthropometric parameters were generated as follows: (1) REE (Sex x 892(.)68) - (Age x 115(.)93) + (Weight x 54(.)96) + (Stature x 1816(.)23) + 1484(.)50 (R-2 0(.)66; SE 1028(.)97 kJ); (2) REE (Sex x 909(.)12) - (Age x 107(.)48) + (fat-free mass x 68(.)39) + (fat mass x 55(.)19) + 3631(.)23 (R-2 0(.)66; SE 1034(.)28 kJ). In the cross-validation group, mean predicted REE values were not significantly different from the mean measured REE for all children and adolescents, as well as for boys and for girls (difference < 2%) and the limits of agreement (+/- 2 SD) were +2(.)06 and -1(.)77 MJ/d (NS). The new prediction equations allow an accurate estimation of REE in groups of severely obese children and adolescents. These equations might be useful for health care professionals and researchers when estimating REE in severely obese children and adolescents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available