MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040889393 · doi:10.1111/jgs.16525

Application of <scp>Cut‐Points</scp> for Low Muscle Strength and Lean Mass in <scp>Mobility‐Limited</scp> Older Adults

2020· article· en· W3040889393 on OpenAlexaff
Gregory J. Grosicki, Thomas G. Travison, Hao Zhu, Jay Magaziner, Ellen F. Binder, Marco Pahor, Rosaly Correa‐de‐Araujo, Peggy M. Cawthon, Shalender Bhasin, Denise Orwig, Susan L. Greenspan, Todd M. Manini, Adam J. Santanasto, Sheena Patel, Roger A. Fielding

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Aging
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesFood and Nutrition ServiceNational Institute on AgingAbbott NutritionNational Institutes of HealthCytokineticsFoundation for the National Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMuscle strengthSarcopeniaLean body massGerontologyMuscle massPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicineBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Sarcopenia Definitions and Outcomes Consortium (SDOC) is a collaborative initiative seeking to develop and evaluate cut-points for low muscle strength and lean mass that predict an increased risk for slowness (usual walking speed <.8 m/s) among older adults. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the present study was to provide clinicians and researchers with an understanding of the diagnostic implications of using SDOC variables and cut-points in mobility-limited older adults. Using data from older individuals with specific conditions that render them at increased risk for mobility limitation, we evaluated the performance characteristics (ie, sensitivity and specificity) of five putative sarcopenia parameters and then compared these values with previously recommended diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of six randomized controlled trials enriched in persons at risk for mobility limitation. SETTING: National and international geriatric clinical research centers. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 925 mobility-limited older adults (≥55 years of age; 58% women) were included in the analysis. MEASUREMENTS: The prevalence of low muscle strength and lean mass were assessed using five candidate metrics discriminative of slowness. Analyses of sensitivity and specificity were used to compare muscle weakness criteria with published diagnostics for sarcopenia. RESULTS: Odds ratios (ORs) supported maximal grip strength (Grip max <35.5 and 20.0 in men and women, respectively) as the most discriminative of slowness in both men and women (OR = 3.66 and 3.53, respectively). More men (58%) than women (30%) fell below sex-specific maximal grip cut-points. When applying previously recommended sarcopenia component definitions in our population, we found that fewer individuals met those criteria (range = 6%-32%). CONCLUSION: A greater number of individuals fall below SDOC Grip max cut-points compared with previous recommendations. Clinicians and researchers working with older adults may consider these thresholds as an inclusive means to identify candidates for low-risk lifestyle promyogenic and function-promoting therapies. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1445-1453, 2020.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207