Harris–Benedict equation estimations of energy needs as compared to measured 24-h energy expenditure by indirect calorimetry in people with early to mid-stage Huntington's disease
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Weight loss and energy metabolism are important clinical research areas in understanding the disease mechanisms in Huntington's disease. Having an accurate method to estimate expected total energy expenditure would likely facilitate the development of studies about these features of the disease. The Harris-Benedict equation is a formula commonly used to estimate basal energy expenditure of individuals, adjusted for height, weight, age and gender. This estimate is then multiplied by a physical activity factor to estimate total daily energy needs to maintain the given weight. Data from 24-h indirect calorimetry was utilized to derive an adjustment formula for the physical activity factor of the Harris-Benedict equation for 13 early to mid-stage Huntington's disease patients. The adjusted activity factor provided the most accurate estimate of energy needs. This adjusted formula can be used in clinical assessments of Huntington's disease patients, as well as in research studies when indirect calorimetry has not been performed.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it