To determine which resting energy expenditure (REE) predictive equation has the lowest bias in the aggregate level in individuals with excess weight during weight loss interventions.
Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, CENTRAL and gray literature databases. Longitudinal studies on weight loss interventions which evaluated REE by predictive equations compared to that measured by indirect calorimetry in adults with excess weight at different follow-up times were included. Meta-analyses were performed with the differences between biases of predictive equations of the REE at the different follow-up times of weight loss.
Of the total of 2178 occurrences found in the databases, only eight studies were included. The Harris-Benedict (1919) equation showed the smallest differences between bias up to the third month (MD = 103.33 kcal; 95%CI = -39.01; 245.67), in the sixth month (MD = 59.16 kcal; 95%CI = 8.74; 109.57) and at the 12th month (MD = -71.41 kcal; 95%CI = -150.38; 7.55) of weight loss follow-up. Weight loss does not seem to have an effect on bias at different follow-up times.
Harris-Benedict (1919) equation seems to be the most adequate to assess the REE of individuals with excess weight during weight loss. However, the finding of large estimated predictive intervals may indicate that predictive equations may not be handy tools for individuals losing and regaining weight due to changes other than body weight.

Longitudinal estimates of resting energy expenditure using predictive equations in individuals with excess weight after weight loss: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Nut consumption is not associated with a higher body weight, and potential energy-regulating mechanisms may include a reduced subsequent energy intake and increased EE. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of tree nut and peanut consumption on energy intake, compensation, and expenditure. PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, and Embase databases were searched from inception to June 2, 2021. Human studies with adults aged ≥18 y older were included. Energy intake and compensation studies were restricted to acute effects (intervention duration of ≤24 h), whereas intervention duration was not limited for EE studies. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to explore weighted mean differences in REE. Twenty-eight articles from 27 studies (16 energy intake studies, 10 EE studies, and 1 study investigating both) with 1121 participants were included in this review, with a variety of nut types addressed (almonds, Brazil nuts, cashews, chestnuts, hazelnuts, peanuts, pistachios, walnuts, and mixed nuts). Energy compensation occurred after nut-containing loads (range: -280.5% to +176.4%) and the degree of compensation varied depending on the form (whole and chopped) and how they were consumed (alone and within a meal). The meta-analyses identified a nonsignificant increase in REE associated with nut consumption (weighted mean difference: 28.6 kcal/d; 95% CI: -10.7, 67.8 kcal/d). This study provided support for energy compensation as a potential mechanism for a lack of association between nut consumption and body weight, whereas no evidence was found for EE as an energy-regulating mechanism of nuts. This review was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42021252292.

Papers