Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1997 May;51(5):333-7.

The validity of predicting the basal metabolic rate of young Australian men and women.

Author information

  • 1Deakin Institute of Human Nutrition, Victoria, Australia.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To assess the accuracy of the Schofield, Schofield & James (1985) equations and those of Hayter & Henry (1994) for the prediction of the basal metabolic rate (BMR), of young Australians.

DESIGN:

BMR was measured by indirect calorimetry, while fat free mass (FFM) and fat mass (FM) were measured by bioelectric impendence analysis (BIA) in 128 volunteers (39 men and 89 women), aged between 18 and 30 y.

SETTING:

Deakin Institute of Human Nutrition, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.

RESULTS:

The measured BMR of Australian men and women were significantly lower (P < or = 0.001) than the predicted BMR using the Schofield et al (1985) equation, with a mean (s.d.) bias (bias = measured - predicted BMR) of -406(513) kj/d in men and -124(348) kj/d in women. The measured BMR of Australian men and women were similar to the predicted BMR using the equations of Hayter & Henry (1994) and bias was unrelated to body weight. BMR adjusted for FFM and FM was significantly higher by three percent in women on oral contraceptive agents (OCA) as compared to those not on OCA.

CONCLUSIONS:

The Schofield et al (1985) equations are not valid for the prediction of BMR of young Australian men and women. The equations of Hayter & Henry (1994) for North Europeans and Americans, provide an accurate estimate of the BMR of Australian men and women at the group level. However, in young women not using OCA a correction factor of 0.97 applied to the predicted BMR provides a better estimate.

PMID:
9152685
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk