OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the doubly labeled water (DLW) method is precise under conditions required for a large-scale evaluation of dietary intake instruments. DESIGN: Energy expenditure was measured in 484 subjects (main study). Subjects received one of five different weight DLW dose bottles prepared in advance of the study. A repeat energy expenditure measure was obtained in a subset of 24 subjects (substudy). DLW measures of energy expenditure were performed over a 2-week interval with urine collection at the beginning and end. SETTING: Free-living environment with three clinic visits in the Maryland suburban area of Washington, DC. SUBJECTS: A total of 484 subjects (261 men and 223 women) aged 40-69 y, 24 of whom (13 men and 11 women) participated in a substudy in which DLW was administered a second time. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation of the DLW energy expenditure measurement was 5.1%. This included a 2.9% analytical and a 4.2% physiologic variation. Based on observed initial isotopic enrichment, the preweighed dosages were optimal in 70% of the main study subjects, and 9% received a dose that was less than optimal. Only six subjects (1%) were excluded because the final isotopic enrichment was too low to conduct precise measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Use of preweighed DLW dosages did not compromise the precision of the DLW method. The DLW method is a reliable measure of energy expenditure for large-scale evaluations of dietary intake instruments.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether the doubly labeled water (DLW) method is precise under conditions required for a large-scale evaluation of dietary intake instruments. DESIGN: Energy expenditure was measured in 484 subjects (main study). Subjects received one of five different weight DLW dose bottles prepared in advance of the study. A repeat energy expenditure measure was obtained in a subset of 24 subjects (substudy). DLW measures of energy expenditure were performed over a 2-week interval with urine collection at the beginning and end. SETTING: Free-living environment with three clinic visits in the Maryland suburban area of Washington, DC. SUBJECTS: A total of 484 subjects (261 men and 223 women) aged 40-69 y, 24 of whom (13 men and 11 women) participated in a substudy in which DLW was administered a second time. RESULTS: The coefficient of variation of the DLW energy expenditure measurement was 5.1%. This included a 2.9% analytical and a 4.2% physiologic variation. Based on observed initial isotopic enrichment, the preweighed dosages were optimal in 70% of the main study subjects, and 9% received a dose that was less than optimal. Only six subjects (1%) were excluded because the final isotopic enrichment was too low to conduct precise measurement. CONCLUSIONS: Use of preweighed DLW dosages did not compromise the precision of the DLW method. The DLW method is a reliable measure of energy expenditure for large-scale evaluations of dietary intake instruments.
Authors: Susan B Racette; Sai Krupa Das; Manjushri Bhapkar; Evan C Hadley; Susan B Roberts; Eric Ravussin; Carl Pieper; James P DeLany; William E Kraus; James Rochon; Leanne M Redman Journal: Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab Date: 2011-11-29 Impact factor: 4.310
Authors: Janet A Tooze; Richard P Troiano; Raymond J Carroll; Alanna J Moshfegh; Laurence S Freedman Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2013-04-17 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: William W Wong; Susan B Roberts; Susan B Racette; Sai Krupa Das; Leanne M Redman; James Rochon; Manjushri V Bhapkar; Lucinda L Clarke; William E Kraus Journal: J Nutr Date: 2014-02-12 Impact factor: 4.798