Role of muscle ultrasound in frailty assessment in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Frailty is a geriatric syndrome that is characterized by increased vulnerability to intrinsic and extrinsic stressors due to decreased biologic reserves. Muscle ultrasound (US) is a valid and reliable method for assessing muscle quantity in older adults. The study aims to examine the relationship between frailty definitions and US-derived muscle parameters. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with type 2 diabetes mellitus outpatients in a tertiary hospital, and all participants underwent a comprehensive geriatric assessment. For frailty assessment, the Fried Frailty Phenotype (FFP), the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS), and the Edmonton Frailty Scale (EFS) were performed. Muscle US measurements included Gastrocnemius Medialis (GM) muscle thickness, GM fascicle length, GM pennation angle, Rectus Femoris (RF) muscle thickness, Rectus Femoris cross-sectional area (RFCSA), Rectus Abdominis (RA) muscle thickness, External Oblique (EO) muscle thickness, Internal Oblique (IO) muscle thickness, and Transverse Abdominis (TA) muscle thickness. RESULTS: In all, 373 participants were included in the study. The median age of participants was 72.7 ± 5.9 years, and 64.6% of them were female. According to the FFP, 18.2% of the participants were living with frailty, 56% of them were pre-frail; 57.4% of them were living with frailty according to the CFS; 25.2% of them were living with frailty, and 20.6% of them were pre-frail according to the EFS. The FFP, CFS, and EFS scores were related to muscle thickness of GM, RF, and RA, fascicle length of GM, and pennation angle of GM and RFCSA. Particularly, GM pennation angle, RF muscle thickness, and RFCSA were associated with an increased risk of frailty. Besides muscle thickness of GM, RF, and RA, fascicle length of GM, pennation angle of GM, and RFCSA were significant for predicting the presence of frailty. CONCLUSIONS: US-derived regional muscle measurements are associated with frailty definitions (in both physical, cumulative deficit, and multidimensional models) in a diabetic geriatric population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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 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".