English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Energy expenditure (TEE) determined by the doubly labeled water technique (DLW) in 10 adult subjects (5 males and 5 females) was used to evaluate the energy expenditure estimated from 24 h heart rate monitoring records (HR method) for 2 d randomly sampled during 2 weeks of DLW study. Individual data on HR and oxygen consumption, obtained during a step test (resting conditions, and up and down at 3 or 4 stepping rates) and postabsorptive conditions (resting metabolic rate: RMR), were used to calculate three types of calibration regression line, i.e., straight-linear regression (EE-HR: A for TEEhr-A), log-linear regression (lnEE-HR: B for TEEhr-B), and two-linear regression (flex-HR method: C for TEEhr-C). When the 24 h HR records were applied, these calibration regressions provided three estimates of TEE (mean +/- SD kcal/24 h): TEEhr-A (3,059 +/- 1,246 in all subjects), TEEhr-B (2,472 +/- 843), and TEEhr-C (2,759 +/- 1,228). Mean TEE determined by the DLW method (TEEdlw) was 2,544 +/- 378 kcal/24 h. Although no mean values estimated by HR methods were significantly different statistically from the mean value of TEEdlw, the variances of the estimates (e.g., SD) by the HR method were much greater than that of TEEdlw (between twofold and threefold). TEEhr-B estimated by lnEE-HR regression provided the smallest differences from that of TEEdlw (mean difference of -3.1% with a range of -35.1(-)+36.6%). From these observations, the following conclusions were made: 1) The estimates of TEE by HR are useful as a group mean, but interpretation of the individual TEE estimates requires caution because of great deviations from the reference values. 2) Among the calibration methods tested, the log-linear calibration regression (lnEE on HR) gives the best estimates of TEE by the HR method and is recommended for use in future studies.

Heart Rate Monitoring as a Field Method for Estimating Energy Expenditure as Evaluated by the Doubly Labeled Water Method.