MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094985863 · doi:10.14283/jfa.2020.48

Methodological Issues and the Impact of Age Stratification on the Proportion of Participants with Low Appendicular Lean Mass When Adjusting for Height and Fat Mass Using Linear Regression: Results from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

2021· article· en· W3094985863 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Mayhew, Stuart M. Phillips, Nazmul Sohel, Lehana Thabane, Paul D. McNicholas, Russell J. de Souza, Gianni Parise, Parminder Raina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Frailty & Aging · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonPopulation Health Research InstituteMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercentileLean body massMedicineDemographyLinear regressionSarcopeniaRegression analysisStatisticsResidualGerontologyMathematicsInternal medicineBody weight

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Using residual values calculated from models regressing appendicular lean mass on fat mass and height is one of several suggested strategies for adjusting appendicular lean mass for body size when measuring sarcopenia. However, special consideration is required when using this technique in different subgroups in order to capture the correct individuals as sarcopenic. OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance about how to conduct stratified analyses for the regression adjustment technique using age groups as an example. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Data collected at baseline (2012-2015) for the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. PARTICIPANTS: Community dwelling participants of European descent aged 45 to 85 years (n=25,399). MEASUREMENTS: Appendicular lean mass, height, and weight were measured. Sex-specific residuals were calculated in participants before and after stratifying participants by age group (45-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-85 years). Cut offs corresponding to the sex-specific 20th percentile residual values in participants ≥65 years were determined first in the residuals calculated in all participants and residuals calculated in only those aged ≥65 years. For each set of cut offs, the percentage of age and sex-stratified participants with low appendicular lean mass were compared for the residuals calculated in all participants and the residuals calculated after stratifying by age. RESULTS: In 12,622 males and 12,737 females, regardless of the cut off used, the percentage of participants with low appendicular lean mass decreased with age when residuals were calculated after age stratification. When the residuals were calculated in all participants, the percentage of participants with sarcopenia increased from the youngest to the oldest age groups. CONCLUSIONS: Sex-specific residuals in all participants should be calculated prior to stratifying the sample by age group, or other stratification variables, for the purposes of developing appendicular lean mass cut offs or subgroup analyses.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.468
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.015 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Frailty & AgingSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207