OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to analyze the validity of the prediction equations for the resting metabolic rate (RMR) proposed by Harris and Benedicti (1919), Schofield (1985), WHO/FAO/ UNU (1985), Henry and Rees (1991), Molnár and cols. (1995), Tverskaya and cols. (1998) and Müller and cols. (2004) in adolescent girls (51 girls between 10 and 17 years of age). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The following anthropometric variables were measured: body weight, stature, body fat mass (absolute and percentage), body lean mass (absolute and percentage) as well as the consumption ofVO2 and production ofVCO2 that were substituted in Weir's (1949) equation which was considered the RMR standard method in this study. The following statistical procedures were carried out: paired t-test (p < 0.05); constant error (CE) with a less than 5% difference and Bland and Altman's (1986) graphical analysis. RESULTS: The equations proposed by Tverskaya and cols. (1998) and Müller and cols. (2004) were the only equations that presented significant differences between the averages. However, only the equations proposed by Henry and Rees (1991) and Molnár and cols. (1995) produced a constant error of less than 5%. However, Bland and Altman's (1986) graphical analysis showed that independently of the equation there is no agreement between the equations and the standard method. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates that none of the equations meet all the stipulated criteria and that thus have no validity in the calculation of the RMR.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to analyze the validity of the prediction equations for the resting metabolic rate (RMR) proposed by Harris and Benedicti (1919), Schofield (1985), WHO/FAO/ UNU (1985), Henry and Rees (1991), Molnár and cols. (1995), Tverskaya and cols. (1998) and Müller and cols. (2004) in adolescent girls (51 girls between 10 and 17 years of age). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The following anthropometric variables were measured: body weight, stature, body fat mass (absolute and percentage), body lean mass (absolute and percentage) as well as the consumption ofVO2 and production ofVCO2 that were substituted in Weir's (1949) equation which was considered the RMR standard method in this study. The following statistical procedures were carried out: paired t-test (p < 0.05); constant error (CE) with a less than 5% difference and Bland and Altman's (1986) graphical analysis. RESULTS: The equations proposed by Tverskaya and cols. (1998) and Müller and cols. (2004) were the only equations that presented significant differences between the averages. However, only the equations proposed by Henry and Rees (1991) and Molnár and cols. (1995) produced a constant error of less than 5%. However, Bland and Altman's (1986) graphical analysis showed that independently of the equation there is no agreement between the equations and the standard method. CONCLUSIONS: The study indicates that none of the equations meet all the stipulated criteria and that thus have no validity in the calculation of the RMR.