EAL

Assessment
In non-obese individuals, what is the prediction accuracy and maximum overestimation and underestimation errors compared to measured resting metabolic rate when using the Harris-Benedict formula?
- Conclusion
  
  In a high research design quality study of non-obese individuals, the Harris-Benedict equation predicted RMR within 10% of measured RMR in 69% of individuals. Among the remaining individuals (31%), 27% were overestimations and 4% were underestimations. In two high quality studies by the same primary researcher, the Harris-Benedict equation predicted RMR within 10% of measured RMR in 59% of individuals; the remaining 41% included 36% overestimations and 5% underestimations. In a study of negative quality, the Harris-Benedict equation predicted RMR within 10% of measured RMR in 80% of normal weight males and 81% of females. The remaining errors (20% and 19% in males and females, respectively) were overestimations. Individual error ranges (using all three studies) was an overestimate by 42% to an underestimate of 23%, indicating a large variation.
- Grade: I
  - Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
  - Grade II is Fair;
  - Grade III is Limited/Weak;
  - Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
  - Grade V is Not Assignable.
  - High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
  - Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
  - Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
  - Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
  - Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.