Hi Juan,

Indeed, it is best to use a prediction equation to estimate RMR that is most representative of the group with whom you are working (in this case active females). An elegant study (Thompson and Manore, 1996) compared actual RMR in the laboratory with predicted RMR values using several equations in an attempt to establish which of these equations works best for active individuals and athletes. They found that the Cunningham (1980) equation best predicted RMR for both active males and females, with the Harris-Benedict (1919) equation being the second best (an underestimation of 9 and 192 kcal/d in the Cunningham (1980) and Harris-Benedict (1919) equations, respectively). The Harris-Benedict (1919) equation is easier to use (because it does not require measurement of lean body mass), and therefore may be more practical to use in a setting where lean body mass cannot be directly measured.

I hope this helps.

Thank you Abdullah Alghannam,

And for calculate TEE = RMR*PAL + thermic effect of activity (TEA);

The TEA is calculated as (TEA=wt (kg)?duration (h)?MET)

what physical activity level (PAL) should utilize for elite athletes who train 3.5 hours/day?

Thank you

Why would you want to use an unreliable prediction equations when working with elite sports people? Why not simple measure it with a spirometer, that way you can calculate a mean sitting and a standing RMR for your subject group? This will remove all the inaccuracy of assumptions and predictions.

In accordance with the previous answers: from my experience the most accurate equation is REE (Kcal/day)=21.6*FFM+370 (Cunningham), but strongly recommend to measure RMR directly!