ArticlePloS one2026
Estimation of resting metabolic rate in professional soccer players: A cross-sectional study comparing traditional predictive equations and a preliminary machine learning model against indirect calorimetry.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResting metabolic rate (RMR) is a major component of total daily energy expenditure and varies according to age, sex, and body composition. Although indirect calorimetry (IC) is the gold standard, predictive equations are widely used in practice. This study evaluated the agreement between twelve traditional RMR equations and IC in professional soccer players and explored a preliminary machine learning approach.
methodsForty male professional soccer players (22.5 ± 4.4 years) were assessed. RMR measured by IC was compared with twelve predictive equations. A support vector regression (SVR) model was developed using anthropometric variables and evaluated under internal validation.
resultsAll equations showed poor concordance with IC (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]: -0.094 to 0.030) and overestimated RMR (8.38% to 36.38%). The SVR model achieved a mean absolute error of 169.3 kcal·day-1 and root mean square error (RMSE) of 190.7 kcal·day-1. Its prediction error was lower than the RMSE and average bias of traditional equations, indicating improved individual-level accuracy. However, it explained a limited proportion of variance (R2 = 0.169).
conclusionTraditional equations showed poor agreement with indirect calorimetry in this sample of soccer players. These findings highlight the risks of relying on conventional predictive equations in professional athletes. Preliminary results suggest that machine learning models may improve estimation under internal validation, providing a proof of concept for data-driven approaches in this field. However, their predictive capacity remains limited, and external validation in larger and independent cohorts is required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.