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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Longitudinal change in energy expenditure and effects on energy requirements of the elderly
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nutrition Journal, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1475-2891-12-73 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jamie A Cooper, Todd M Manini, Chad M Paton, Yosuke Yamada, James E Everhart, Steve Cummings, Dawn C Mackey, Anne B Newman, Nancy W Glynn, Fran Tylavsky, Tamara Harris, Dale A Schoeller, for the Health ABC study |
| Abstract |
BACKGROUND: Very little is known about the longitudinal changes in energy requirements in late life. The purposes of this study were to: (1) determine the energy requirements in late life and how they changed during a 7 year time-span, (2) determine whether changes in fat free mass (FFM) were related to changes in resting metabolic rate (RMR), and (3) determine the accuracy of predicted total energy expenditure (TEE) to measured TEE. METHODS: TEE was assessed via doubly labeled water (DLW) technique in older adults in both 1999 (n = 302; age: 74 +/- 2.9 yrs) and again in 2006 (n = 87 age: 82 +/- 3.1 yrs). RMR was measured with indirect calorimetry, and body composition was assessed with dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. RESULTS: The energy requirements in the 9th decade of life were 2208 +/- 376 kcal/d for men and 1814 +/- 337 kcal/d for women. This was a significant decrease from the energy requirements in the 8th decade of life in men (2482 +/- 476 kcal/d vs. 2208 +/- 376 kcal/d) but not in women (1892 +/- 271 kcal/d vs. 1814 +/- 337 kcal/d). In addition to TEE, RMR, and activity EE (AEE) also decreased in men, but not women, while FFM decreased in both men and women. The changes in FFM were correlated with changes in RMR for men (r = 0.49, p < 0.05) but not for women (r = -0.08, ns). Measured TEE was similar to Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) predicted TEE for men (2208 +/- 56 vs. 2305 +/- 35 kcal/d) and women (1814 +/- 42 vs. 1781 +/- 20 kcal/d). However, measured TEE was different than the World Health Organization (WHO) predicted TEE in men (2208 +/- 56 vs. 2915 +/- 31 kcal/d (p < 0.05)) and women (1814 +/- 42 vs. 2315 +/- 21 kcal/d (p < 0.05)). CONCLUSIONS: TEE, RMR and AEE decreased in men, but not women, from the 8th to 9th decade of life. The DRI equation to predict TEE was comparable to measured TEE, while the WHO equation over-predicted TEE in our elderly population. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 18 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 16 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 18% |
| Sports and Recreations | 12 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 9% |
| Unknown | 20 | 22% |
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 09 June 2013.
All research outputs
#18,340,012
of 22,711,645 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,263
of 1,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#148,500
of 197,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#47
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,711,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.1. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 197,653 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.