Abstract
An accurate, simple method for assessing energy expenditure in individuals and in free-living populations continues to be elusive. To compare estimates of energy expenditure (EE) from a combination of two previously validated physical activity questionnaires: Tecumseh Occupational (EETEC) and a 4-wk history version of the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity that included household activities (EEMNLTPA) and EE from sleep (EESLEEP), to EE obtained from doubly labeled water (EEDLW). We studied free-living males (n = 24) eating a controlled diet designed to maintain body weight and determined EE from doubly labeled water (DLW) during 14 days and EE from physical activity instruments used in epidemiological studies (EETEC and EEMNLTPA). There was excellent agreement between EEDLW (mean ± SEM, 13.55 ± 0.38 MJ/d) and EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP (EETOTAL1) (13.79 ± 0.89 MJ/d) with a difference of only 1.0% ± 5.4%. When the EE from watching TV, reading, and childcare activities was added the total EE (EETOTAL2) (14.87 ± 0.90 MJ/D) overestimated EEDLW by 8.9% ± 5.4%. Both of these estimates of EE had significant regressions against EEDLW (EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP, R2 = 0.38, P < 0.001; EETOTAL2, R2 = 0.39, P < 0.001). Men whose occupations involved significant intermittent moderate activity had the largest disagreement between EEDLW and estimates from the questionnaires. This investigation demonstrates that a combination of previously validated physical activity questionnaires can be used to accurately determine the mean energy expenditure of a population of employed males.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 392-399 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Epidemiology |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2002 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Doubly labeled water
- Energy expenditure
- Males
- Validation
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Epidemiology
Cite this
Estimating energy expenditure from the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity and Tecumseh Occupational Activity questionnaires - A doubly labeled water validation. / Conway, Joan M.; Irwin, Melinda L.; Ainsworth, Barbara.
In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 55, No. 4, 2002, p. 392-399.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Estimating energy expenditure from the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity and Tecumseh Occupational Activity questionnaires - A doubly labeled water validation
AU - Conway, Joan M.
AU - Irwin, Melinda L.
AU - Ainsworth, Barbara
PY - 2002
Y1 - 2002
N2 - An accurate, simple method for assessing energy expenditure in individuals and in free-living populations continues to be elusive. To compare estimates of energy expenditure (EE) from a combination of two previously validated physical activity questionnaires: Tecumseh Occupational (EETEC) and a 4-wk history version of the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity that included household activities (EEMNLTPA) and EE from sleep (EESLEEP), to EE obtained from doubly labeled water (EEDLW). We studied free-living males (n = 24) eating a controlled diet designed to maintain body weight and determined EE from doubly labeled water (DLW) during 14 days and EE from physical activity instruments used in epidemiological studies (EETEC and EEMNLTPA). There was excellent agreement between EEDLW (mean ± SEM, 13.55 ± 0.38 MJ/d) and EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP (EETOTAL1) (13.79 ± 0.89 MJ/d) with a difference of only 1.0% ± 5.4%. When the EE from watching TV, reading, and childcare activities was added the total EE (EETOTAL2) (14.87 ± 0.90 MJ/D) overestimated EEDLW by 8.9% ± 5.4%. Both of these estimates of EE had significant regressions against EEDLW (EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP, R2 = 0.38, P < 0.001; EETOTAL2, R2 = 0.39, P < 0.001). Men whose occupations involved significant intermittent moderate activity had the largest disagreement between EEDLW and estimates from the questionnaires. This investigation demonstrates that a combination of previously validated physical activity questionnaires can be used to accurately determine the mean energy expenditure of a population of employed males.
AB - An accurate, simple method for assessing energy expenditure in individuals and in free-living populations continues to be elusive. To compare estimates of energy expenditure (EE) from a combination of two previously validated physical activity questionnaires: Tecumseh Occupational (EETEC) and a 4-wk history version of the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity that included household activities (EEMNLTPA) and EE from sleep (EESLEEP), to EE obtained from doubly labeled water (EEDLW). We studied free-living males (n = 24) eating a controlled diet designed to maintain body weight and determined EE from doubly labeled water (DLW) during 14 days and EE from physical activity instruments used in epidemiological studies (EETEC and EEMNLTPA). There was excellent agreement between EEDLW (mean ± SEM, 13.55 ± 0.38 MJ/d) and EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP (EETOTAL1) (13.79 ± 0.89 MJ/d) with a difference of only 1.0% ± 5.4%. When the EE from watching TV, reading, and childcare activities was added the total EE (EETOTAL2) (14.87 ± 0.90 MJ/D) overestimated EEDLW by 8.9% ± 5.4%. Both of these estimates of EE had significant regressions against EEDLW (EETEC + EEMNLTPA + EESLEEP, R2 = 0.38, P < 0.001; EETOTAL2, R2 = 0.39, P < 0.001). Men whose occupations involved significant intermittent moderate activity had the largest disagreement between EEDLW and estimates from the questionnaires. This investigation demonstrates that a combination of previously validated physical activity questionnaires can be used to accurately determine the mean energy expenditure of a population of employed males.
KW - Doubly labeled water
KW - Energy expenditure
KW - Males
KW - Validation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036129597&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036129597&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00497-8
DO - 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00497-8
M3 - Article
VL - 55
SP - 392
EP - 399
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
SN - 0895-4356
IS - 4
ER -