MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4310942625 · doi:10.1111/ajag.13164

The Australian and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (<scp>ANZSSFR</scp>) sarcopenia diagnosis and management task force: Findings from the consumer expert Delphi process

2022· article· en· W4310942625 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralasian Journal on Ageing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilMejeribrugets ForskningsFondUniversity of MelbourneNestlé Health ScienceDeakin UniversityDairy Farmers of CanadaAustralian GovernmentFonterra Co-Operative GroupAarhus UniversitetshospitalAarhus UniversitetAmgenNederlandse Zuivel OrganisatieCalifornia Dairy Research FoundationAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineDelphi methodPsychological interventionGerontologyFamily medicineNursingInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To develop guidelines, informed by health-care consumer values and preferences, for sarcopenia prevention, assessment and management for use by clinicians and researchers in Australia and New Zealand. METHODS: A three-phase Consumer Expert Delphi process was undertaken between July 2020 and August 2021. Consumer experts included adults with lived experience of sarcopenia or health-care utilisation. Phase 1 involved a structured meeting of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Sarcopenia and Frailty Research (ANZSSFR) Sarcopenia Diagnosis and Management Task Force and consumer representatives from which the Phase 2 survey was developed. In Phase 2, consumers from Australia and New Zealand were surveyed online with opinions sought on sarcopenia outcome priorities, consultation preferences and interventions. Findings were confirmed and disseminated in Phase 3. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Twenty-four consumers (mean ± standard deviation age 67.5 ± 12.8 years, 18 women) participated in Phase 2. Ten (42%) identified as being interested in sarcopenia, 7 (29%) were health-care consumers and 6 (25%) self-reported having/believing they have sarcopenia. Consumers identified physical performance, living circumstances, morale, quality of life and social connectedness as the most important outcomes related to sarcopenia. Consumers either had no preference (46%) or preferred their doctor (40%) to diagnose sarcopenia and preferred to undergo assessments at least yearly (54%). For prevention and treatment, 46% of consumers preferred resistance exercise, 2-3 times per week (54%). CONCLUSIONS: Consumer preferences reported in this study can inform the implementation of sarcopenia guidelines into clinical practice at local, state and national levels across Australia and New Zealand.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.287 · 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