Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry-Measured Lean Soft Tissue Mass: Differing Relation to Body Cell Mass Across the Adult Life Span
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lean soft tissue (LST) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is used as a metabolic measure in aging research despite evidence of extracellular fluid expansion and a corresponding reduction in body cell mass (BCM) in older participants. We investigated the hypothesis that the fraction of LST as BCM is smaller with greater age. Men and women (n = 2043) had DEXA and 40K-counting for body potassium and BCM measured on the same day. Both BCM and LST were lower with greater age but the relative lowering was larger for BCM. A multiple linear regression model was fitted with BCM/LST as the dependent variable, and age, sex, and interaction terms as independent variables. Men had a mean BCM/LST greater (p < .001) than women; quadratic and cubic age terms were also significant or approached significance. Thus, the fraction of LST as BCM is smaller in older adults, a finding that has implications for the interpretation of DEXA results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".