Validation of a predictive method for an accurate assessment of resting energy expenditure in medical mechanically ventilated patients*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Use comparison with indirect calorimetry to confirm the ability of our previously described equation to predict resting energy expenditure in mechanically ventilated patients. DESIGN: Prospective, validation study. SETTING: Eighteen-bed, medical intensive care unit at a teaching hospital. PATIENTS: All adult patients intubated >24 hrs were assessed for eligibility. Exclusion criteria were clinical situations that could contribute to erroneous calorimetric measurements. INTERVENTIONS: Resting energy expenditure was calculated using the original Harris-Benedict equations and those corrected for usual stress factors, the Swinamer equation, the Fusco equation, the Ireton-Jones equation, and our equation: resting energy expenditure (kcal/day) = 8 x weight (kg) + 14 x height (cm) + 32 x minute ventilation (L/min) + 94 x temperature (degrees C) - 4834. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Resting energy expenditure was measured by indirect calorimetry for the 45 included patients. Resting energy expenditure calculated with our predictive model correlated with the measured resting energy expenditure (r2 = .62, p < .0001), and Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean bias of -192 +/- 277 kcal/day, with limits of agreement ranging from -735 to 351 kcal/day. Resting energy expenditure calculated with the Harris-Benedict equations was more weakly correlated with measured resting energy expenditure (r2 = .41, p < .0001), with Bland-Altman analysis showing a mean bias of 279 +/- 346 kcal/day between them and the limits of agreement ranging from -399 to 957 kcal/day. Applying usual stress-correction factors to the Harris-Benedict equations generated wide variability, and the correlation with measured resting energy expenditure was poorer (r2 = .18, p < .0001), with Bland-Altman analysis showing a mean bias of -357 +/- 750 kcal/day and limits of agreement ranging from -1827 to 1113 kcal/day. The use of the Swinamer, Fusco, or Ireton-Jones predictive methods yielded weaker correlation between calculated and measured resting energy expenditure (r2 = .41, p < .0001; r2 = .38, p < .0001; r2 = .39, p < .0001, respectively) than our equation, and Bland-Altman analysis showed no improvement in agreement and variability between methods. CONCLUSIONS: The Faisy equation, based on static (height), less stable (weight), and dynamic biometric variables (temperature and minute ventilation), provided precise and unbiased resting energy expenditure estimations in mechanically ventilated patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".