2010
DOI: 10.1123/jpah.7.4.508
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Errors in MET Estimates of Physical Activities Using 3.5 ml·kg−1·min−1 as the Baseline Oxygen Consumption

Abstract: Purpose:To compare intensity misclassification and activity MET values using measured RMR (measMET) compared with 3.5 ml·kg−1·min−1 (standMET) and corrected METs [corrMET = mean standMET × (3.5 ÷ Harris-Benedict RMR)] in subgroups.Methods:RMR was measured for 252 subjects following a 4-hr fast and before completion of 11 activities. VO2 was measured during activity using indirect calorimetry (n = 2555 activities). Subjects were classified by BMI category (normal-weight or overweight/obese), sex, age (decade 20… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
107
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
3
107
1
Order By: Relevance
“…To account for missing data during these times, participants were required to register all non-wear periods (the activity, time and duration) in a diary [37]. Appropriate Metabolic Equivalent (MET) values from the Compendium of Physical Activities [38] were assigned to these reported activities, and were subsequently corrected to account for individual variation [39]. Corrected METs were used to estimate non-wear energy expenditure [38].…”
Section: Energy Expenditurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…To account for missing data during these times, participants were required to register all non-wear periods (the activity, time and duration) in a diary [37]. Appropriate Metabolic Equivalent (MET) values from the Compendium of Physical Activities [38] were assigned to these reported activities, and were subsequently corrected to account for individual variation [39]. Corrected METs were used to estimate non-wear energy expenditure [38].…”
Section: Energy Expenditurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mean intensity of the activities was also expressed as an estimated number of METs; 1 MET is generally assumed to be 3.5 ml · min -1 · kg -1 (Ainsworth et al, 2000), but due to the high age of participants this resting metabolic rate is probably overestimated (Kozey, Lyden, Staudenmayer, & Freedson, 2010). Therefore, the Harris-Benedict equation (Harris & Benedict, 1918) was used to estimate the resting metabolic rate as recommended recently for this age group (Kozey et al, 2010); for men the resting metabolic rate in kilocalories per day is 66.4730 + 5.0033 × height (cm) + 13.7516 × weight (kg) -6.7550 × age (years), and for women it is 655.0955 + 1.8496 × height (cm) + 9.5634 × weight (kg) -4.6756 × age (years).…”
Section: Outcome Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the Harris-Benedict equation (Harris & Benedict, 1918) was used to estimate the resting metabolic rate as recommended recently for this age group (Kozey et al, 2010); for men the resting metabolic rate in kilocalories per day is 66.4730 + 5.0033 × height (cm) + 13.7516 × weight (kg) -6.7550 × age (years), and for women it is 655.0955 + 1.8496 × height (cm) + 9.5634 × weight (kg) -4.6756 × age (years).…”
Section: Outcome Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the values in the Compendium do not take into account specific variables such as age, sex or body mass among others. Given all that, it is advisable for further studies to adjust the obtained MET values by following the guidelines proposed by some authors [10,28].…”
Section: Classification According To Pa Levelmentioning
confidence: 99%