MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116015864 · doi:10.1177/0898264310388562

Association Between Muscle Mass, Leg Strength, and Fat Mass With Physical Function in Older Adults: Influence of Age and Sex

2010· article· en· W2116015864 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aging and Health · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuscle massFat massSarcopeniaMedicineMuscle strengthBody mass indexPhysical therapyGerontologyInternal medicineDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to determine the relationship between muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle quality, and fat mass with a composite measure of physical function in older adults, and to determine whether these relations differed by age and sex. METHOD: Participants consisted of 1280 adults aged ≥ 55 yr from the NHANES study. Reduced rank regression was used to identify patterns of muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle quality, and fat mass related to physical function. RESULTS: A single relevant pattern emerged that included leg strength and fat mass as predictors of the 7 physical function variables. The leg strength loading was significantly greater than the fat mass loading in men and women aged 55-64 and ≥ 75, and differed between sexes. CONCLUSION: Leg strength and fat mass best predict physical function in older adults and the relative importance varies according to age and sex.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.299 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it