Estimation of basal metabolic rate in Chinese: are the current prediction equations applicable?

Nutrition Journal

Table 3 Mean predicted BMR and difference with measured BMR

	Mean ± SD (kJ/d)	Bias ± SD (kJ/d)	P value in paired t-test	R²	Limits of Agreement (kJ/d)
a.
Cross-sectional study (n = 232)
Singapore	6230 ± 1115	-3 ± 534	NA	0.81*	-1070 to 1064
HB [11]	6777 ± 1124	545 ± 607	<0.0001	0.76*	-669 to 1759
Henry [8]	6362 ± 1003	131 ± 655	<0.005	0.72*	-1179 to1440
Liu [26]	6558 ± 1187	426 ± 745	<0.0001	0.79*	-718 to 1570
Mifflin [30]	6397 ± 1080	165 ± 621	<0.0001	0.74*	-1076 to 1406
Owen [31, 32]	6214 ± 1036	-17 ± 604	0.66	0.79*	-1225 to 1190
Yang [25]	7028 ± 1638	850 ± 786	<0.0001	0.79*	-721 to 2421
b.
Cross-validation study (n = 70)
Singapore	5651 ± 1055	56 ± 407	0.25	0.87*	-759 to 870
HB [11]	6356 ± 998	761 ± 413	<0.0001	0.87*	-65 to 1586
Henry [8]	6029 ± 980	434 ± 469	<0.0001	0.83*	-503 to 1371
Liu [26]	6154 ± 1107	559 ± 381	<0.0001	0.89*	-204 to 1322
Mifflin [30]	6030 ± 1000	435 ± 429	<0.0001	0.85*	-424 to 1293
Owen [31, 32]	5722 ± 934	126 ± 516	0.044	0.79*	-907 to 1159
Yang [25]	6225 ± 1545	630 ± 668	<0.0001	0.85*	-707 to 1967

ISSN: 1475-2891