Suppr超能文献

通过因素法和心率法计算的女性每日能量消耗

Daily energy expenditure of women by factorial and heart rate methods.

作者信息

Spurr G B, Dufour D L, Reina J C, Haught T A

机构信息

Department of Physiology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, USA.

出版信息

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997 Sep;29(9):1255-62. doi: 10.1097/00005768-199709000-00020.

Abstract

To compare the minute-by-minute heart rate (Flex-HR) reference method with the factorial method, total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) and the pattern of daily energy expenditure (EE) were measured in nonpregnant, nonlactating women 19-40 yr of age, working at their household chores (at home, N = 20) or for remuneration in various kinds of employment (at work, N = 28). The factorial method used three data sets described in the compendium of Ainsworth et al. (CMD), FAO/WHO/UNU (FAO), and James and Schofield (J&S). Measurements were repeated on three rounds separated by 3 months. The TDEE by Flex-HR method, by round, was 9.0 +/- 2.6, 8.9 +/- 1.4, and 10.3 +/- 3.4 MJ.d-1 in the women at home and 9.7 +/- 2.3, 11.4 +/- 3.2, and 11.3 +/- 3.6 MJ.d-1 in the women at work. Values using the CMD data set were not significantly different from Flex-HR in either group in any round, but FAO and J&S data sets gave significantly lower values than both of the former methods in all rounds. The same statistical results were obtained for the patterns of activity. Since the timing of activities by the observers was the same, it is concluded that the major source of error in applying the factorial method is in the values for energy expenditure assigned to the various activities and the ability of investigators to properly judge EE from available data sets.

摘要

为了将逐分钟心率(Flex-HR)参考方法与因子法进行比较,我们对19至40岁的非妊娠、非哺乳期女性的每日总能量消耗(TDEE)和每日能量消耗模式(EE)进行了测量,这些女性要么在家做家务(在家组,N = 20),要么从事各种有报酬的工作(工作组,N = 28)。因子法使用了安斯沃思等人(CMD)、粮农组织/世界卫生组织/联合国大学(FAO)以及詹姆斯和斯科菲尔德(J&S)汇编中描述的三个数据集。测量在相隔3个月的三轮中重复进行。在家女性中,Flex-HR方法得出的三轮TDEE分别为9.0±2.6、8.9±1.4和10.3±3.4兆焦·天⁻¹,工作女性中则分别为9.7±2.3、11.4±3.2和11.3±3.6兆焦·天⁻¹。在任何一轮中,使用CMD数据集得出的值与Flex-HR方法在两组中均无显著差异,但FAO和J&S数据集在所有轮次中得出的值均显著低于前两种方法。活动模式也得到了相同的统计结果。由于观察者记录活动的时间相同,因此得出结论,应用因子法时的主要误差来源在于分配给各种活动的能量消耗值,以及研究人员根据现有数据集正确判断能量消耗的能力。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验