MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890396273 · doi:10.1113/jp275443

The impact of exercise and nutrition on the regulation of skeletal muscle mass

2018· review· en· W2890396273 on OpenAlexafffund
Chris McGlory, Stephan van Vliet, Tanner Stokes, Bettina Mittendorfer, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research ChairsDiabetes CanadaNational Institutes of HealthMedical Research CouncilAmerican Diabetes Association
KeywordsSarcopeniaSkeletal muscleMuscle massMuscle strengthMedicineAgeingBiologyBioinformaticsPhysiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The maintenance of skeletal muscle mass and strength throughout life is a key determinant of human health and well-being. There is a gradual loss of both skeletal muscle mass and strength with ageing (a process termed sarcopenia) that increases the risk of functional dependence, morbidity and mortality. Understanding the factors that regulate the size of human muscle mass, particularly during the later years of life, has therefore become an area of intense scientific inquiry. The amount of muscle mass is determined by coordinated changes in muscle protein synthesis (MPS) and muscle protein breakdown (MPB). In this review, we assess both classical and contemporary work that has examined how resistance exercise and nutrition impact on MPS and MPB. Special consideration is given to the role of different sources of dietary protein (food vs. supplements) and non-protein nutrients such as omega-3 fatty acids in regulating MPS. We also critically evaluate recent studies that have employed novel 'omic' technologies such as dynamic protein profiling to probe for changes in rates of MPS and MPB at the individual protein level following exercise. Finally, we provide suggestions for future research that we hope will yield important information for the development of exercise and nutritional strategies to counteract muscle loss in a variety of clinical settings.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations104
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrench-language works237,207