[no title]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Objective: to compare anthropometric equations with one that uses BIA to predict muscle mass in patients with SCA. Methods: 76 patients with ages from 22 to 72 years had their muscle mass estimated by the equation that employs BIA and by five anthropometric equations. The results were analyzed using Pearson's and intraclass correlation coefficient, the paired t test and the Bland-Altman plot. Results: the mean weight and height ± SD were 64.2 ± 14 kg and 1.61 m ± 8 cm, respectively. The equation proposed by Lee et al. (2000), which uses body weight and height measurements, produced the best results in predicting muscle mass, since a significant bias value was not detected, and both a stronger linear correlation (r = 0.94) and higher intraclass correlation (ICC = 0.93). Conclusion: this anthropometric equation can be used to reliably estimate and monitor decreases in muscle mass in people with SCA.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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".