Resting energy expenditure in adolescents with Down syndrome: a comparison of commonly used predictive equations.
The Institute of Medicine equation gives near-exact resting calorie needs for teens with Down syndrome.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team wanted to know which math formula best guesses resting energy needs in teens with Down syndrome.
They measured real resting energy use with a mask and machine. Then they compared the number to five common prediction equations.
All teens had Down syndrome and were about high-school age.
What they found
The Institute of Medicine equation came closest. It overestimated by only 14 calories per day.
That is less than one bite of a banana, so clinicians can trust it for meal planning.
How this fits with other research
Sajith et al. (2008) also tuned an assessment tool for Down syndrome. They trimmed language and motor items from the BSID-II to get a cleaner cognitive score.
Like Diemer et al. (2023), they showed small tweaks make tests more accurate for this group.
Esbensen (2017) asked for better, validated tools before running big trials. The new REE equation answers that call for nutrition planning.
Why it matters
You now have a quick, low-cost way to set calorie goals. Plug height, weight, age, and sex into the Institute of Medicine formula. No mask needed. Use it to check if meals match energy needs and to spot unexplained weight gain or loss early.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Open the IOM calculator, enter your teen’s data, and compare the result to their current meal calories.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescents with Down syndrome (DS) are two to three times more likely to be obese than their typically developing peers. When preventing or treating obesity, it is useful for clinicians to understand an individual's energy intake needs. Predictive resting energy expenditure (REE) equations are often recommended for general use in energy intake recommendations; however, these predictive equations have not been validated in youth with DS. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of seven commonly used predictive equations for estimating REE in adolescents who are typically developing to REE measured by indirect calorimetry in adolescents with DS. METHODS: Adolescents with DS participated in a 90-min laboratory visit before 10:00 a.m. after a 12-h overnight fast and a 48-h abstention from aerobic exercise. REE was measured via indirect calorimetry, and estimated REE was derived using the Institute of Medicine, Molnar, Muller and World Health Organization equations. Mean differences between the measured and predicted REE for each equation were evaluated with equivalency testing, and P-values were adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Holm method. RESULTS: Forty-six adolescents with DS (age: 15.5 ± 1.7 years, 47.8% female, 73.9% non-Hispanic White) completed the REE assessment. Average measured REE was 1459.5 ± 267.8 kcal/day, and the Institute of Medicine equations provided the most accurate prediction of REE with a 1.7 ± 11.2% (13.9 ± 170.3 kcal/day) overestimation. This prediction was not statistically different from the measured REE [P-value = 0.582; 95% confidence interval (CI): -64.5, 36.7], and the difference between the measured and predicted REE was statistically equivalent to zero (P-value = 0.024; 90% CI: -56.1, 28.3). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the Institute of Medicine equation may be useful in predicting REE in adolescents with DS. Future research should confirm these results in a larger sample and determine the utility of the Institute of Medicine equation for energy intake recommendations during a weight management intervention.
Journal of intellectual disability research : JIDR, 2023 · doi:10.1111/jir.12995