↓ Skip to main content

Estimation of basal metabolic rate in Chinese: are the current prediction equations applicable?

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Estimation of basal metabolic rate in Chinese: are the current prediction equations applicable?
Published in
Nutrition Journal, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12937-016-0197-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stefan G. Camps, Nan Xin Wang, Wei Shuan Kimberly Tan, C. Jeyakumar Henry

Abstract

Measurement of basal metabolic rate (BMR) is suggested as a tool to estimate energy requirements. Therefore, BMR prediction equations have been developed in multiple populations because indirect calorimetry is not always feasible. However, there is a paucity of data on BMR measured in overweight and obese adults living in Asia and equations developed for this group of interest. The aim of this study was to develop a new BMR prediction equation for Chinese adults applicable for a large BMI range and compare it with commonly used prediction equations. Subjects were 121 men and 111 women (age: 21-67 years, BMI: 16-41 kg/m(2)). Height, weight, and BMR were measured. Continuous open-circuit indirect calorimetry using a ventilated hood system for 30 min was used to measure BMR. A regression equation was derived using stepwise regression and accuracy was compared to 6 existing equations (Harris-Benedict, Henry, Liu, Yang, Owen and Mifflin). Additionally, the newly derived equation was cross-validated in a separate group of 70 Chinese subjects (26 men and 44 women, age: 21-69 years, BMI: 17-39 kg/m(2)). The equation developed from our data was: BMR (kJ/d) = 52.6 x weight (kg) + 828 x gender + 1960 (women = 0, men = 1; R(2) = 0.81). The accuracy rate (within 10 % accurate) was 78 % which compared well to Owen (70 %), Henry (67 %), Mifflin (67 %), Liu (58 %), Harris-Benedict (45 %) and Yang (37 %) for the whole range of BMI. For a BMI greater than 23, the Singapore equation reached an accuracy rate of 76 %. Cross-validation proved an accuracy rate of 80 %. To date, the newly developed Singapore equation is the most accurate BMR prediction equation in Chinese and is applicable for use in a large BMI range including those overweight and obese.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 85 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Lecturer 7 8%
Researcher 6 7%
Student > Master 4 5%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 34 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 35 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,813,370
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,237
of 1,433 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#244,101
of 337,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#14
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,433 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 337,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.