Department of Health, Exercise and Sports Science, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA.
Department of Kinesiology, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC, USA.
Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2021 Jul;46(7):711-718. doi: 10.1139/apnm-2020-0887. Epub 2021 Jan 20.
Prediction equations have been considered an accurate method for estimating resting metabolic rate (RMR) across multiple populations, but their accuracy for college-aged individuals not on an athletics team remains to be determined. Sixty-two college-aged (18-30 yrs) males ( = 31) and females ( = 31) had their RMR measured (RMRm), using indirect calorimetry, and body composition assessed via air-displacement plethysmography. The World Health Organization (WHO), Mifflin-St Jeor (Mifflin), Harris-Benedict (HB), Cunningham, and Nelson equations were used to estimate RMR. No difference was observed between the Cunningham and RMRm regardless of sex ( ≥ 0.05). All other prediction equations estimated a significantly lower RMR for males ( < 0.05). The Mifflin and Nelson equations predicted an RMR that was significantly lower than RMRm for females ( < 0.05). When compared with RMRm, no difference was detected for females using the WHO, HB, or Cunningham ( ≥ 0.05). Only the Nelson equation predicted an RMR that was outside of the clinically acceptable range (±10% of RMRm) regardless of sex. The Cunningham, WHO, and HB equations can accurately predict RMR for college-aged males and females. RMR prediction equations used in this study are less accurate for those with greater RMRs. For adults 18-30 years old that are not on an athletics team, the Cunningham equation can accurately predict RMR. The Nelson equation should not be used to predict RMR for this population. There is a systematic bias for RMR prediction equations to underestimate higher measured RMR values.
预测方程被认为是一种在多个人群中准确估计静息代谢率（RMR）的方法，但它们在非运动队的大学生中的准确性仍有待确定。62 名年龄在 18-30 岁的男性（n=31）和女性（n=31）接受了间接测热法测量的 RMR（RMRm），并通过空气置换体描记法评估了身体成分。世界卫生组织（WHO）、米夫林-斯捷尔（Mifflin）、哈里斯-本尼迪克特（HB）、坎宁安和纳尔逊方程被用来估计 RMR。无论性别如何，Cunningham 方程与 RMRm 之间没有差异（≥0.05）。所有其他预测方程都估计男性的 RMR 明显较低（<0.05）。米夫林和纳尔逊方程预测女性的 RMR 明显低于 RMRm（<0.05）。与 RMRm 相比，女性使用 WHO、HB 或 Cunningham 方程时，没有差异（≥0.05）。无论性别如何，只有纳尔逊方程预测的 RMR 不在临床可接受范围（±10%的 RMRm）内。Cunningham、WHO 和 HB 方程可以准确预测大学生男性和女性的 RMR。在这项研究中使用的 RMR 预测方程对于那些 RMR 较高的人不太准确。对于非运动队的 18-30 岁成年人，Cunningham 方程可以准确预测 RMR。对于这个人群，不应该使用纳尔逊方程来预测 RMR。RMR 预测方程存在系统偏差，倾向于低估较高的实测 RMR 值。
