Use of Resting Metabolic Rate Ratio as a Relative Energy Deficiency in Sports Indicator in Female Athletes

IF 3.8 Q2 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Jessica L Garay , Julia Galindo Sebe , Jenna Strickland , Lindsey Graves , Margaret A Voss
{"title":"Use of Resting Metabolic Rate Ratio as a Relative Energy Deficiency in Sports Indicator in Female Athletes","authors":"Jessica L Garay ,&nbsp;Julia Galindo Sebe ,&nbsp;Jenna Strickland ,&nbsp;Lindsey Graves ,&nbsp;Margaret A Voss","doi":"10.1016/j.cdnut.2025.106007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Female athletes are at risk of relative energy deficiency in sport (REDs) if energy intake is insufficient relative to demand. REDs is commonly identified via low energy availability (EA), which is determined by measuring dietary intake, exercise energy expenditure, and lean body mass. Due to inconsistent methods to measure each component of EA, the use of resting metabolic rate (RMR) ratio is proposed as an alternate method to identify REDs.</div></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>The purpose of this study was to identify REDs prevalence among a sample of physically active college-aged females using RMR ratio and correlate this with EA.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Females (18–24 y) who were members of a NCAA division 1 athletics team or highly physically active (greater than 4 d/wk) participated in the study. Body composition was measured using air displacement plethysmography. RMR was measured using indirect calorimetry. Participants reported dietary intake via a 24-h recall for 1–3 d. EA was calculated using an averaged activity factor of 1.67 to determine exercise energy expenditure. RMR was calculated using standard equations (Harris–Benedict, Owen, and Cunningham).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 77 physically active female college students participated, including 53 NCAA division 1 athletes. Mean EA was 24.5 ± 12.8 kcal/kg fat-free mass/d and 63% of participants met criteria for low EA (&lt;30 kcal/kg fat-free mass/d). Mean RMR ratio was 1.08 ± 0.16, with 19% of the sample having low RMR ratio (below 0.9). Overall, 14% of participants had both low EA and low RMR ratio. There were no differences in EA or RMR ratio between the collegiate athlete and recreational athlete groups.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Physically active female college students, including collegiate athletes, exhibited suboptimal EA. Low RMR ratio appeared to be a more sensitive indicator of REDs risk than low EA.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10756,"journal":{"name":"Current Developments in Nutrition","volume":"9 5","pages":"Article 106007"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Developments in Nutrition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2475299125014672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Female athletes are at risk of relative energy deficiency in sport (REDs) if energy intake is insufficient relative to demand. REDs is commonly identified via low energy availability (EA), which is determined by measuring dietary intake, exercise energy expenditure, and lean body mass. Due to inconsistent methods to measure each component of EA, the use of resting metabolic rate (RMR) ratio is proposed as an alternate method to identify REDs.

Objectives

The purpose of this study was to identify REDs prevalence among a sample of physically active college-aged females using RMR ratio and correlate this with EA.

Methods

Females (18–24 y) who were members of a NCAA division 1 athletics team or highly physically active (greater than 4 d/wk) participated in the study. Body composition was measured using air displacement plethysmography. RMR was measured using indirect calorimetry. Participants reported dietary intake via a 24-h recall for 1–3 d. EA was calculated using an averaged activity factor of 1.67 to determine exercise energy expenditure. RMR was calculated using standard equations (Harris–Benedict, Owen, and Cunningham).

Results

A total of 77 physically active female college students participated, including 53 NCAA division 1 athletes. Mean EA was 24.5 ± 12.8 kcal/kg fat-free mass/d and 63% of participants met criteria for low EA (<30 kcal/kg fat-free mass/d). Mean RMR ratio was 1.08 ± 0.16, with 19% of the sample having low RMR ratio (below 0.9). Overall, 14% of participants had both low EA and low RMR ratio. There were no differences in EA or RMR ratio between the collegiate athlete and recreational athlete groups.

Conclusions

Physically active female college students, including collegiate athletes, exhibited suboptimal EA. Low RMR ratio appeared to be a more sensitive indicator of REDs risk than low EA.
利用静息代谢率作为女性运动员运动中相对能量缺乏指标的研究
背景女性运动员在运动中如果能量摄入不足,就有可能出现能量相对不足(REDs)。相对能量缺乏通常是通过低能量可用性(EA)来识别的,而能量可用性是通过测量饮食摄入量、运动能量消耗和瘦体重来确定的。由于测量 EA 各组成部分的方法不一致,有人建议使用静息代谢率(RMR)比值作为识别 REDs 的替代方法。本研究的目的是使用 RMR 比值识别 REDs 在大学女生中的流行率,并将其与 EA 相关联。使用空气位移血压计测量身体成分。使用间接热量计测量 RMR。参与者通过 1-3 天的 24 小时回忆报告饮食摄入量。EA 采用平均活动系数 1.67 计算,以确定运动能量消耗。RMR采用标准方程(Harris-Benedict、Owen和Cunningham)计算。平均 EA 为 24.5 ± 12.8 千卡/千克去脂质量/天,63% 的参与者符合低 EA 标准(30 千卡/千克去脂质量/天)。平均 RMR 比率为 1.08 ± 0.16,19% 的样本具有低 RMR 比率(低于 0.9)。总体而言,有 14% 的参与者同时具有低 EA 和低 RMR 比率。大学生运动员组和休闲运动员组在 EA 或 RMR 比率方面没有差异。与低EA相比,低RMR比似乎是REDs风险更敏感的指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Current Developments in Nutrition
Current Developments in Nutrition NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
4.20%
发文量
1327
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信