Lean mass and lower limb muscle function in relation to hip strength, geometry and fracture risk indices in community-dwelling older women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a population-based sample of British women aged over 70 years old, lean mass and peak lower limb muscle force were both independently associated with hip strength and fracture risk indices, thereby suggesting a potential benefit of promoting leg muscle strengthening exercise for the prevention of hip fractures in postmenopausal women. To investigate cross-sectional associations of lean mass and physical performance, including lower limb muscle function, with hip strength, geometry and fracture risk indices (FRIs) in postmenopausal women. Data were from the Cohort of Skeletal Health in Bristol and Avon. Total hip (TH) and femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD), hip geometry and total body lean mass (TBLM) were assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Finite element analysis of hip DXA was used to derive FN, intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric FRIs. Grip strength, gait speed and chair rise time were measured objectively. Lower limb peak muscle force and muscle power were assessed by jumping mechanography. In total, 241 women were included (age = 76.4; SD = 2.6 years). After adjustment for age, height, weight/fat mass and comorbidities, TBLM was positively associated with hip BMD (β TH BMD = 0.36, P ≤ 0.001; β FN BMD = 0.26, P = 0.01) and cross-section moment of inertia (0.24, P ≤ 0.001) and inversely associated with FN FRI (− 0.21, P = 0.03) and intertrochanteric FRI (− 0.11, P = 0.05) (estimates represent SD difference in bone measures per SD difference in TBLM). Lower limb peak muscle force was positively associated with hip BMD (β TH BMD = 0.28, P ≤ 0.001; β FN BMD = 0.23, P = 0.008) and inversely associated with FN FRI (− 0.17, P = 0.04) and subtrochanteric FRI (− 0.18, P = 0.04). Associations of grip strength, gait speed, chair rise time and peak muscle power with hip parameters were close to the null. Lean mass and lower limb peak muscle force were associated with hip BMD and geometrical FRIs in postmenopausal women. Leg muscle strengthening exercises may therefore help prevent hip fractures in older women.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".