MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399305458 · doi:10.1139/apnm-2023-0618

Development and validation of reference equations for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-derived measures of fat-free mass in adults aged 45–85 years: results from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

2024· article· en· W4399305458 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Alex R. Jenkins, Hayley Lewthwaite, Dennis Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual-energy X-ray absorptiometryFat free massDual energyGerontologyMedicineFat massSarcopeniaLongitudinal studyBody mass indexPhysical therapyInternal medicineBone mineralOsteoporosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reference equations for fat-free mass (FFM) and lean soft tissue mass (LM) measures obtained from dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) are important for the interpretation of body composition. This study developed and validated reference equations for FFM and LM using DEXA from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Reference equations were developed using data from a random population-based sample of ostensibly healthy and functionally independent adults aged 45-85 years. Reference equations for absolute (accounting for age, sex, height, and body mass) and height-adjusted aka index (accounting for age, sex, and body mass index) measures of FFM and LM were developed using quantile regression. Reference equations were respectively developed and validated in derivation (80%) and validation cohorts (20%). Reference equations were applied to symptomatic adults with self-reported chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or heart disease to assess discriminant validity; and compared with other published equations to assess performance. Bland-Altman analyses and Lin's concordance correlation coefficients were utilised to assess agreement. Reference equations for 5th, 10th, 50th, 90th, and 95th percentiles were developed for DEXA-derived estimates of FFM and LM based on 1881 healthy participants (57% male) aged 55 [IQR: 50-61] years. Reference equations performed comparably in the validation cohort and discriminated reference values between ostensibly healthy adults and people with symptomatic COPD or heart disease. Previously published reference equations tended to over- or under-predict estimates of LM compared with the current reference equations. This study provides a comprehensive and validated set of reference equations for estimating and interpreting FFM and LM from DEXA in Canadian adults aged 45-85 years, although additional validation may be required for those >75 years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.546
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→