MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042000985 · doi:10.3390/nu12072057

Nutritional Supplements to Support Resistance Exercise in Countering the Sarcopenia of Aging

2020· review· en· W3042000985 on OpenAlexaff
James McKendry, Brad S. Currier, Changhyun Lim, Jonathan C. Mcleod, Aaron C. Q. Thomas, Stuart M. Phillips

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrients · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle metabolism and nutrition
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaSkeletal muscleMedicineMuscle massCreatineResistance trainingNutritional SupplementationVitamin D and neurologyDiseaseGerontologyPolyunsaturated fatty acidIntensive care medicineEndocrinologyInternal medicineBiologyFatty acidBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Skeletal muscle plays an indispensable role in metabolic health and physical function. A decrease in muscle mass and function with advancing age exacerbates the likelihood of mobility impairments, disease development, and early mortality. Therefore, the development of non-pharmacological interventions to counteract sarcopenia warrant significant attention. Currently, resistance training provides the most effective, low cost means by which to prevent sarcopenia progression and improve multiple aspects of overall health. Importantly, the impact of resistance training on skeletal muscle mass may be augmented by specific dietary components (i.e., protein), feeding strategies (i.e., timing, per-meal doses of specific macronutrients) and nutritional supplements (e.g., creatine, vitamin-D, omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids etc.). The purpose of this review is to provide an up-to-date, evidence-based account of nutritional strategies to enhance resistance training-induced adaptations in an attempt to combat age-related muscle mass loss. In addition, we provide insight on how to incorporate the aforementioned nutritional strategies that may support the growth or maintenance of skeletal muscle and subsequently extend the healthspan of older individuals.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.863

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations118
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrientsSame topicMuscle metabolism and nutritionFrench-language works237,207