Additional anthropometric measures may improve the predictability of basal metabolic rate in adult subjects

A. M. Johnstone, K. A. Rance, S. D. Murison, James Stuart Duncan, John Roger Speakman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

44 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The most commonly used predictive equation for basal metabolic rate (BMR) is the Schofield equation, which only uses information on body weight, age and sex to derive the prediction. However, because body composition is a key influencing factor, there will be error in calculating an individual's basal requirements based on this prediction.
Objective: To investigate whether adding additional anthropometric measures to the standard measures can enhance the predictability of BMR and to cross-validate this within a separate subgroup.
Design: Cross-sectional study of 150 Caucasian adults from Scotland, with a body mass index range of 16.7-49.3 kg/m(2). All subjects underwent measurement of BMR, body composition, and 148 also had basic skinfold and circumference measures taken. The resultant equation was tested in a subgroup of 39 obese males.
Results: The average difference between the predicted (Schofield equation) and measured BMR was 502 kJ/day. There was a slight systematic bias in this error, with the Schofield equation underestimating the lowest values. The average discrepancy between predicted and actual BMR was reduced to 452 kJ/day, with the addition of fat mass, fat-free mass, an overall 10% improvement on the Schofield equation (P = 0.054). Using an equation derived from principal components analysis of anthropometry measurements similarly decreased the difference to 458 kJ/day (P = 0.039). Testing the equation in a separate group indicated a 33% improvement in predictability of BMR, compared to the Schofield equation.
Conclusions: In the absence of detailed information on body composition, utilizing anthropometric data provides a useful alternative methodology to improve the predictability of BMR beyond that achieved from the standard Schofield prediction equation. This should be confirmed in more individuals, both within the obese and normal weight category.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1437-1444
Number of pages8
JournalEuropean Journal of Clinical Nutrition
Volume60
Issue number12
Early online date12 Jul 2006
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Keywords

  • energy requirements
  • metabolism
  • health
  • body composition
  • anthropometry
  • resting energy expenditure
  • fat-free mass
  • measurement error
  • women
  • prediction
  • men
  • age

Cite this

Additional anthropometric measures may improve the predictability of basal metabolic rate in adult subjects. / Johnstone, A. M.; Rance, K. A.; Murison, S. D.; Duncan, James Stuart; Speakman, John Roger.

In: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 60, No. 12, 2006, p. 1437-1444.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Johnstone, A. M. ; Rance, K. A. ; Murison, S. D. ; Duncan, James Stuart ; Speakman, John Roger. / Additional anthropometric measures may improve the predictability of basal metabolic rate in adult subjects. In: European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2006 ; Vol. 60, No. 12. pp. 1437-1444.
@article{bc7217320bc34b56b02dffddbd3b37a5,
title = "Additional anthropometric measures may improve the predictability of basal metabolic rate in adult subjects",
abstract = "Background: The most commonly used predictive equation for basal metabolic rate (BMR) is the Schofield equation, which only uses information on body weight, age and sex to derive the prediction. However, because body composition is a key influencing factor, there will be error in calculating an individual's basal requirements based on this prediction. Objective: To investigate whether adding additional anthropometric measures to the standard measures can enhance the predictability of BMR and to cross-validate this within a separate subgroup. Design: Cross-sectional study of 150 Caucasian adults from Scotland, with a body mass index range of 16.7-49.3 kg/m(2). All subjects underwent measurement of BMR, body composition, and 148 also had basic skinfold and circumference measures taken. The resultant equation was tested in a subgroup of 39 obese males. Results: The average difference between the predicted (Schofield equation) and measured BMR was 502 kJ/day. There was a slight systematic bias in this error, with the Schofield equation underestimating the lowest values. The average discrepancy between predicted and actual BMR was reduced to 452 kJ/day, with the addition of fat mass, fat-free mass, an overall 10{\%} improvement on the Schofield equation (P = 0.054). Using an equation derived from principal components analysis of anthropometry measurements similarly decreased the difference to 458 kJ/day (P = 0.039). Testing the equation in a separate group indicated a 33{\%} improvement in predictability of BMR, compared to the Schofield equation. Conclusions: In the absence of detailed information on body composition, utilizing anthropometric data provides a useful alternative methodology to improve the predictability of BMR beyond that achieved from the standard Schofield prediction equation. This should be confirmed in more individuals, both within the obese and normal weight category.",
keywords = "energy requirements, metabolism, health, body composition, anthropometry, resting energy expenditure, fat-free mass, measurement error, women, prediction, men, age",
author = "Johnstone, {A. M.} and Rance, {K. A.} and Murison, {S. D.} and Duncan, {James Stuart} and Speakman, {John Roger}",
year = "2006",
doi = "10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602477",
language = "English",
volume = "60",
pages = "1437--1444",
journal = "European Journal of Clinical Nutrition",
issn = "0954-3007",
publisher = "NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Additional anthropometric measures may improve the predictability of basal metabolic rate in adult subjects

AU - Johnstone, A. M.

AU - Rance, K. A.

AU - Murison, S. D.

AU - Duncan, James Stuart

AU - Speakman, John Roger

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - Background: The most commonly used predictive equation for basal metabolic rate (BMR) is the Schofield equation, which only uses information on body weight, age and sex to derive the prediction. However, because body composition is a key influencing factor, there will be error in calculating an individual's basal requirements based on this prediction. Objective: To investigate whether adding additional anthropometric measures to the standard measures can enhance the predictability of BMR and to cross-validate this within a separate subgroup. Design: Cross-sectional study of 150 Caucasian adults from Scotland, with a body mass index range of 16.7-49.3 kg/m(2). All subjects underwent measurement of BMR, body composition, and 148 also had basic skinfold and circumference measures taken. The resultant equation was tested in a subgroup of 39 obese males. Results: The average difference between the predicted (Schofield equation) and measured BMR was 502 kJ/day. There was a slight systematic bias in this error, with the Schofield equation underestimating the lowest values. The average discrepancy between predicted and actual BMR was reduced to 452 kJ/day, with the addition of fat mass, fat-free mass, an overall 10% improvement on the Schofield equation (P = 0.054). Using an equation derived from principal components analysis of anthropometry measurements similarly decreased the difference to 458 kJ/day (P = 0.039). Testing the equation in a separate group indicated a 33% improvement in predictability of BMR, compared to the Schofield equation. Conclusions: In the absence of detailed information on body composition, utilizing anthropometric data provides a useful alternative methodology to improve the predictability of BMR beyond that achieved from the standard Schofield prediction equation. This should be confirmed in more individuals, both within the obese and normal weight category.

AB - Background: The most commonly used predictive equation for basal metabolic rate (BMR) is the Schofield equation, which only uses information on body weight, age and sex to derive the prediction. However, because body composition is a key influencing factor, there will be error in calculating an individual's basal requirements based on this prediction. Objective: To investigate whether adding additional anthropometric measures to the standard measures can enhance the predictability of BMR and to cross-validate this within a separate subgroup. Design: Cross-sectional study of 150 Caucasian adults from Scotland, with a body mass index range of 16.7-49.3 kg/m(2). All subjects underwent measurement of BMR, body composition, and 148 also had basic skinfold and circumference measures taken. The resultant equation was tested in a subgroup of 39 obese males. Results: The average difference between the predicted (Schofield equation) and measured BMR was 502 kJ/day. There was a slight systematic bias in this error, with the Schofield equation underestimating the lowest values. The average discrepancy between predicted and actual BMR was reduced to 452 kJ/day, with the addition of fat mass, fat-free mass, an overall 10% improvement on the Schofield equation (P = 0.054). Using an equation derived from principal components analysis of anthropometry measurements similarly decreased the difference to 458 kJ/day (P = 0.039). Testing the equation in a separate group indicated a 33% improvement in predictability of BMR, compared to the Schofield equation. Conclusions: In the absence of detailed information on body composition, utilizing anthropometric data provides a useful alternative methodology to improve the predictability of BMR beyond that achieved from the standard Schofield prediction equation. This should be confirmed in more individuals, both within the obese and normal weight category.

KW - energy requirements

KW - metabolism

KW - health

KW - body composition

KW - anthropometry

KW - resting energy expenditure

KW - fat-free mass

KW - measurement error

KW - women

KW - prediction

KW - men

KW - age

U2 - 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602477

DO - 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602477

M3 - Article

C2 - 16835601

VL - 60

SP - 1437

EP - 1444

JO - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

JF - European Journal of Clinical Nutrition

SN - 0954-3007

IS - 12

ER -