Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Equations evaluated in this study.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 1.

Description of the study participants (N = 90) for (A) age group and (B) activity level (hours per week).

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 2.

Subjects characteristics: mean ± standard deviation [range].

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Description of sports activity.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Resting energy expenditure prediction equations given in their original unit (kcal/day, except Schofield (MJ/day)).

More »

Table 4 Expand

Figure 2.

Predicted REE (MJ/day) plotted against REE (MJ/day) measured by indirect calorimetry for male (open dot) and female (filled dot).

Graphs represent (A) the new weight-based and (B) the new FFM-based equation. The solid line is the line of identity.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Outcome measures for the REE predictive equations for male (N = 53) and female (N = 37).

The graphs represent (A) Percentage bias (±SD), (B) percentage accurate REE predictions and (C) Root mean squared error (MJ/day).

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Limits of agreement analysis (bias: vertical solid line; 95% confidence interval: vertical dashed lines) for REE predictive equations versus measured REE (MJ/day) for male (open dot) and female (filled dot).

Graphs represent equations of (A) new weight-based; (B) new FFM-based; (C) De Lorenzo; (D) Cunningham; (E) Owen FFM and (F) Harris-Benedict 1984.

More »

Figure 4 Expand