Nutrient Intake and its Association with Appendicular Total Lean Mass, Function and Strength in Older Adults: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment options for sarcopenia are currently limited, primarily relying on two main therapeutic approaches: resistance-based physical activity and dietary interventions. However, details about specific nutrients in the diet or supplementation are unclear. Our objective is to investigate the relationship between nutrient intake and lean mass, function, and strength. Data were derived from the Gothenburg H70 birth cohort study in Sweden, including 719 70-year-olds born in 1944 (54,1 % females). For independent variables, the diet history method (face-to-face interviews) was used to estimate habitual food intake during the preceding three months. Dependent variables were gait speed (muscle performance), hand grip strength (muscle strength) and appendicular lean soft tissue index (ALSTI). Linear regression analyses were performed to analyze the relationship between the dependent variables and each of the covariates. Several nutrients were positively associated with ALSTI, such as polyunsaturated fatty acids (DHA, EPA), selenium, zinc, riboflavin, niacin equivalent, vitamin B12, vitamin D, iron, and protein. After correction for multiple tests, there were no remaining correlations with handgrip and gait speed. Findings of positive correlations for some nutrients with lean mass suggest a role for these nutrients for maintaining muscle volume. These results can be used to inform clinical trials to expand the preventive strategies and treatment options for individuals at risk of muscle loss and sarcopenia.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".