MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

When Do We Start Observing A Decline In Muscle Strength And Mass As We Age?

2024· article· en· W4402556301 on OpenAlexaff
Alejandro Gaytán-González, Juan López-Taylor, Darren E. R. Warburton

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBody Composition Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMuscle massMuscle strengthSarcopeniaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGerontologyPsychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sarcopenia is a common condition in older adults, and it occurs after years of muscle strength and muscle mass loss. However, the age at which these two variables start to decline remains elusive. PURPOSE: To determine the age when muscle strength and mass reach a peak score and start to decline, as well as their average decline rate by sex in young and middle-aged adults. METHODS: This was a secondary data analysis from the cross-sectional National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), cycles 2011-2014. We analyzed the registries from 2562 females and 2746 males (ages 20 to 59 y) with data of combined handgrip strength (HGS) as a measure of muscle strength, DXA-derived appendicular lean soft tissue (ALST), and legs and arms lean soft tissue (LST), as indicators of muscle mass. Individual segmented linear regression models were used with age as a predictor (continuous in years) and the HGS (kg force), ALST (kg), legs LST (kg), and arms LST (kg) as outcome variables to determine the age when the outcome variable reached a peak score (age breaking point) and posterior slope. RESULTS: The mean ± SD for age, HGS, ALST, legs and arms LST was 38.9 ± 11.4 y, 59.2 ± 10.6 kg, 18.5 ± 4.4 kg, 14.0 ± 3.5 kg, and 4.6 ± 1.1 kg, for females, and 38.2 ± 11.5 y, 92.5 ± 16.9 kg, 27.1 ± 5.2 kg, 19.3 ± 3.8 kg, 7.8 ± 1.5 kg, for males, respectively. The HGS decline started at similar ages in males (34.9 y, 95% CI: 32.5 - 37.3) and females (33.0 y, 30.1 - 35.9), with a more pronounced decline in males (-1.03 kg/y) than females (-0.61 kg/y). However, the ALST decline started later in females (48.5 y, 43.5 - 53.4) than in males (35.9 y, 30.8 - 41.0) with similar decline rates (-0.16 kg/y both). The arms LST decline started at similar ages in males (36.1 y, 32.7 - 39.4) and females (33.0 y, 27.5 - 38.5), but males showed a more pronounced decline than females (-0.07 vs -0.03 kg/y, respectively). Finally, the starting decline in legs LST was observed later in females (48.9 y, 44.2 - 53.6) than in males (35.4 y, 28.9 - 42.0), with a greater decline in females than males (-0.13 vs -0.09 kg/y, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The age when muscle strength started to decline was similar by sex (about 34 y) but differs in the decline rate. The age when muscle mass started to decline was sex-dependent and occurs later in females mainly because of the later start in legs muscle mass decline.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseSame topicBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207