Variables Influencing the Effectiveness of Creatine Supplementation as a Therapeutic Intervention for Sarcopenia
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sarcopenia is an age-related muscle condition characterized by a reduction in muscle quantity, force generating capacity and physical performance. Sarcopenia occurs in 8-13% of adults ≥ 60 years of age and can lead to disability, frailty, and various other diseases. Over the past few decades, several leading research groups have focused their efforts on developing strategies and recommendations for attenuating sarcopenia. One potential nutritional intervention for sarcopenia is creatine supplementation. However, research is inconsistent regarding the effectiveness of creatine on aging muscle. The purpose of this perspective paper is to: (1) propose possible reasons for the inconsistent responsiveness to creatine in aging adults, (2) discuss the potential mechanistic actions of creatine on muscle biology, (3) determine whether the timing of creatine supplementation influences aging muscle, (4) evaluate the evidence investigating the effects of creatine with other compounds (protein, conjugated linoleic acid) in aging adults, and (5) provide insight regarding the safety of creatine for aging adults.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it