Multicompartment body composition analysis in older adults: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: During aging, changes occur in the proportions of muscle, fat, and bone. Body composition (BC) alterations have a great impact on health, quality of life, and functional capacity. Several equations to predict BC using anthropometric measurements have been developed from a bi-compartmental (2-C) approach that determines only fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM). However, these models have several limitations, when considering constant density, progressive bone demineralization, and changes in the hydration of the FFM, as typical changes during senescence. Thus, the main purpose of this study was to propose and validate a new multi-compartmental anthropometric model to predict fat, bone, and musculature components in older adults of both sexes. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 100 older adults of both sexes. To determine the dependent variables (fat mass [FM], bone mineral content [BMC], and appendicular lean soft tissue [ALST]) whole total and regional dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) body scans were performed. Twenty-nine anthropometric measures and sex were appointed as independent variables. Models were developed through multivariate linear regression. Finally, the predicted residual error sum of squares (PRESS) statistic was used to measure the effectiveness of the predicted value for each dependent variable. RESULTS: : 0.85 and SEE: 1.65). CONCLUSION: The equations provide a reliable, practical, and low-cost instrument to monitor changes in body components during the aging process. The internal cross-validation method PRESS presented sufficient reliability in the model as an inexpensive alternative for clinical field use.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".