This is as close as I know of, from a 2001 study.
When all subjects were pooled together, absolute RMR significantly
increased by 7% (5928 +/- 1225 vs 6328 +/- 1336 kJ.d-1, P < 0.001).
Furthermore, ST increased absolute RMR by 7% in both young (6302 +/-
1458 vs 6719 +/- 1617 kJ x d(-1), P < 0.01) and older (5614 +/- 916 vs
5999 +/- 973 kJ x d(-1), P < 0.05) subjects, with no significant
interaction between the two age groups. In contrast, there was a
significant gender x time interaction (P < 0.05) for absolute RMR with
men increasing RMR by 9% (6645 +/- 1073 vs 7237 +/- 1150 kJ x d(-1), P
< 0.001), whereas women showed no significant increase (5170 +/- 884
vs 5366 +/- 692 kJ x d(-1), P = 0.108). When RMR was adjusted for
fat-free mass (FFM) using ANCOVA, with all subjects pooled together,
there was still a significant increase in RMR with ST. Additionally,
there was still a gender effect (P < 0.05) and no significant age
effect (P = NS), with only the men still showing a significant
elevation in RMR. Moreover, EEPA and TEE estimated with a Tritrac
accelerometer and TEE estimated by the Stanford Seven-Day Physical
Activity Recall Questionnaire did not change in response to ST for any
I think you can walk away with this by saying that men had a 7% increase.