Deakin University

File(s) under embargo

Development and validation of age-specific predictive equations for total energy expenditure and physical activity levels for older adults

journal contribution
posted on 2024-03-27, 02:38 authored by Judi PorterJudi Porter, Leigh C Ward, Kay Nguo, Alexander Ward, Zoe Davidson, Simone Gibson, Ross Prentice, Marian L Neuhouser, Helen Truby
BACKGROUND: Predicting energy requirements for older adults is compromised by the underpinning data being extrapolated from younger adults. OBJECTIVES: To generate and validate new total energy expenditure (TEE) predictive equations specifically for older adults using readily available measures (age, weight, height) and to generate and test new physical activity level (PAL) values derived from 1) reference method of indirect calorimetry and 2) predictive equations in adults aged ≥65 y. METHODS: TEE derived from "gold standard" methods from n = 1657 (n = 1019 females, age range 65-90 y), was used to generate PAL values. PAL ranged 1.28-2.05 for males and 1.26-2.06 for females. Physical activity (PA) coefficients were also estimated and categorized (inactive to very active) from population means. Nonlinear regression was used to develop prediction equations for estimating TEE. Double cross-validation in a randomized, sex-stratified, age-matched 50:50 split, and leave one out cross-validation were performed. Comparisons were made with existing equations. RESULTS: Equations predicting TEE using the Institute of Medicine method are as follows: For males, TEE = -5680.17 - 17.50 × age (years) + PA coefficient × (6.96 × weight [kilograms] + 44.21 × height [centimeters]) + 1.13 × resting metabolic rate (RMR) (kilojoule/day). For females, TEE = -5290.72 - 8.38 × age (years) + PA coefficient × (9.77 × weight [kilograms] + 41.51 × height [centimeters]) + 1.05 × RMR (kilojoule/day), where PA coefficient values range from 1 (inactive) to 1.51 (highly active) in males and 1 to 1.44 in females respectively. Predictive performance for TEE from anthropometric variables and population mean PA was moderate with limits of agreement approximately ±30%. This improved to ±20% if PA was adjusted for activity category (inactive, low active, active, and very active). Where RMR was included as a predictor variable, the performance improved further to ±10% with a median absolute prediction error of approximately 4%. CONCLUSIONS: These new TEE prediction equations require only simple anthropometric data and are accurate and reproducible at a group level while performing better than existing equations. Substantial individual variability in PAL in older adults is the major source of variation when applied at an individual level.



The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition




United States








Elsevier BV