Cut Points of Muscle Strength Associated with Metabolic Syndrome in Men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The loss of muscle strength with age increases the likelihood of chronic conditions, including metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, the minimal threshold of muscle strength at which the risk for MetS increases has never been established. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify a threshold of muscle strength associated with MetS in men. METHODS: We created receiver operating curves for muscle strength and the risk of MetS from a cross-sectional sample of 5685 men age <50 yr and 1541 men age ≥50 yr enrolled in the Aerobics Center Longitudinal Study. The primary outcome measure, the MetS, was defined according to the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria. Upper and lower body muscle strength was treated as a composite measure of one-repetition maximum tests on bench and leg press and scaled to body weight. Low muscle strength was defined as the lowest age-specific 20th percentile, whereas high muscle strength was defined as composite muscle strength above the 20th percentile. RESULTS: In men aged <50 yr, the odds of MetS were 2.20-fold (95% confidence interval = 1.89-2.54) higher in those with low muscle strength, independent of age, smoking, and alcohol intake. The strength of this association was similar for men age ≥50 yr (odds ratio = 2.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.62-2.74). In men age < 50 yr, the composite strength threshold associated with MetS was 2.57 kg·kg body weight, whereas in men age ≥ 50 yr the threshold was 2.35 kg·kg body weight. CONCLUSION: This study is the first to identify a threshold of muscle strength associated with an increased likelihood of MetS in men. Measures of muscle strength may help identify men at risk of chronic disease.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".