MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of Sarcopenia Among Community-Dwelling At-Risk Frail Adults Aged 65 Years and Older Who Received Multidomain Lifestyle Interventions

2019· article· en· W2981222019 on OpenAlexaff
Yanxia Lu, Mathew Niti, Keng Bee Yap, Crystal Tze Ying Tan, Ma Shwe Zin Nyunt, Liang Feng, Boon Yeow Tan, Gribson Chan, Sue Anne Khoo, Sue Mei Chan, Philip Yap, Anis Larbi, Tze Pin Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicinePsychological interventionGerontologyPhysical therapyRandomized controlled trialGeriatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: There is little understanding of the outcomes associated with active lifestyle interventions for sarcopenia among older persons. Objective: To determine the association of 6-month multidomain lifestyle interventions (physical exercise, nutritional enhancement, cognitive training, combined treatment, and standard care) with change in sarcopenia status and physical function among adults 65 years and older. Design, Setting, and Participants: Post hoc secondary analysis of a parallel-group randomized clinical trial conducted from September 1, 2012, to September 1, 2014, at community centers providing services to elderly individuals in Singapore. Participants included a subsample of 92 community-dwelling prefrail or frail older persons with sarcopenia aged 65 years and older. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2017, to January 1, 2018. Interventions: The 5 intervention groups were a 6-month duration of physical exercise that included resistance and balance training, nutritional enhancement with a commercial oral nutrition supplement formula, cognitive training, a combination of the preceding 3 interventions, and standard care (control). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were changes in sarcopenia status and its components, appendicular skeletal muscle index (ASMI), knee extension strength (KES), and gait speed (GS) at 3 months and 6 months following the intervention. Sarcopenia was defined as the presence of both low ASMI and low KES and/or GS. Results: In 92 participants with sarcopenia, the mean (SD) age was 70.0 (4.7) years and 59 (64.1%) were female. Seventy-eight participants received active interventions and 14 received standard care. Of 92 total participants, the number who remained sarcopenic was reduced to 48 (of 73) after 3 months and 51 (of 75) after 6 months of intervention, indicating that 25 of 92 participants (27.2%) experienced sarcopenia reduction at 3 months and 24 of 92 (26.1%) had sarcopenia reduction at 6 months. Low KES was present in 88 of 92 patients (95.6%), and low GS in 30 of 92 patients (32.6%) at baseline. Among the components of sarcopenia, GS had the greatest change associated with active interventions, with 22 of 30 participants (73.3%) free of low GS at 6 months; in comparison, 17 of 88 participants (19.3%) were free of low KES at 6 months and 7 of 92 participants (7.6%) were free of low ASMI at 6 months. Men experienced greater reduction in sarcopenia than women (χ2 = 5.925; P = .02), as did those with younger age (t = -2.078; P = .04) or higher ASMI (mean [SD] ASMI, 5.74 [0.77] vs 5.14 [0.77] kg/m2; P = .002). Participants in the active intervention group experienced statistically significant decreases in sarcopenia score and its components at 3 months and 6 months from baseline (F = 14.138; P < .001), but the intervention was not associated with significant differences in ASMI, KES, and GS vs standard care. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that older persons with sarcopenia are responsive to the effects of multidomain lifestyle interventions. Sarcopenia reduction was most pronounced through improved gait speed, and occurred more among those who were male, were younger, or had greater muscle mass.

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)0.003
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations50
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207