MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115695352 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2025.1694609

Impact of sarcopenia on functional and cognitive recovery in Caucasian post-stroke patients following rehabilitation

2025· article· en· W7115695352 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistero della Salute
KeywordsSarcopeniaRehabilitationPsychological interventionCognitionIndependence (probability theory)Activities of daily livingCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background & aims Sarcopenia, a progressive and generalized skeletal muscle disorder, significantly hinders post-stroke recovery. Existing research has focused exclusively on Asian populations, leaving effects in Caucasian cohorts largely unexplored. This study aims to evaluate the impact of sarcopenia, as defined by the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) criteria, on functional and cognitive recovery in subacute post-stroke patients undergoing a rehabilitation program. Methods Eighty seven subacute post-stroke patients (71 [61–78] years; 42 women) were evaluated at admission (T0) and after 6 weeks of rehabilitation (T1). At T0, demographic, clinical, and nutritional data were collected, and sarcopenia was diagnosed. Functional and cognitive outcomes—including the modified Barthel Index (mBI), Fugl-Meyer Assessment for Upper Extremity (FMA-UE), Motricity Index for upper and lower limbs (MI-UE, MI-LE), Functional Ambulation Category (FAC), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)—were evaluated at both T0 and T1. Functional and cognitive recovery (ΔmBI, ΔFMA-UE, ΔMI-UE, ΔMI-LE, and ΔMoCA) were also assessed. Intra-group (T0 vs. T1) and inter-group comparisons (sarcopenic vs. nonsarcopenic patients) were then evaluated, and a Propensity Score Matching (PSM) analysis was used to adjust for baseline confounding factors. Results Sarcopenic patients ( n = 24; 14 women) showed poorer nutritional status and lower scores in all functional and cognitive measurements at T0 compared to their non-sarcopenic counterparts. Both groups improved significantly at T1 in mBI, FMA-UE, MI-UE, MI-LE, and FAC. However, even after PSM analysis, the sarcopenic patients exhibited lower FAC (0 [0–1] vs. 3 [1–3], p = 0.010) and lower mBI (40 [27–57] vs. 57 [47–72], p = 0.044) scores at T1, along with a reduced ΔmBI (6 [0–14] vs. 15 [8–21], p = 0.014). Conclusion Our findings emphasize that sarcopenia negatively affects post-stroke recovery of independence and ambulation, highlighting the importance of early identification and targeted interventions in rehabilitation.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207