Effects of Omega-3 Supplementation Alone and Combined with Resistance Exercise on Skeletal Muscle in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sarcopenia negatively affects skeletal muscle mass and function in older adults. Omega-3 (ω-3) fatty acid supplementation, with or without resistance exercise training (RET), is suggested to play a role as a therapeutic component to prevent or treat the negative effects of sarcopenia. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted on the impact of ω-3 fatty acid supplementation with or without RET on measures of muscle mass and function in older adults (≥55 y). The data sources included SPORTDiscus, PubMed, and Medline. All the study types involving ω-3 fatty acid supplementation on measures of muscle mass and function in older adults (without disease) were included. The mean differences (MDs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and pooled effects assessed. Sixteen studies (1660 females, 778 males) met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. ω-3 fatty acid supplementation did not impact lean tissue mass (SMD 0.09 [-0.10, 0.28]). Benefits were observed for lower body strength (SMD 0.54 [0.33, 0.75]), timed-up-and-go (MD 0.29 [0.23, 0.35]s), and 30-s sit-to-stand performance (MD 1.93 [1.59, 2.26] repetitions) but not walking performance (SMD -0.01 [-0.10, 0.07]) or upper body strength (SMD 0.05 [-0.04, 0.13]). Supplementing with ω-3 fatty acids may improve the lower-body strength and functionality in older 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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".