| Title |
Frailty and sarcopenia: definitions and outcome parameters
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Osteoporosis International, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00198-012-1913-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
C. Cooper, W. Dere, W. Evans, J. A. Kanis, R. Rizzoli, A. A. Sayer, C. C. Sieber, J.-M. Kaufman, G. Abellan van Kan, S. Boonen, J. Adachi, B. Mitlak, Y. Tsouderos, Y. Rolland, J.-Y. L. Reginster |
| Abstract |
An operational definition of musculoskeletal decline in older people is needed to allow development of interventions for prevention or treatment, as was developed for the treatment of osteoporosis. Frailty and sarcopenia are linked, but distinct, correlates of musculoskeletal aging that have many causes, including age-related changes in body composition, inflammation, and hormonal imbalance. With the emergence of a number of exciting candidate therapies to retard the loss of muscle mass with aging, the derivation of a consensual definition of sarcopenia and physical frailty becomes an urgent priority. Although several consensual definitions have been proposed, these require clinical validation. An operational definition, which might provide a threshold for treatment/trial inclusion, should incorporate a loss of muscle mass as well as evidence of a decrease in muscle strength and/or physical activity. Evidence is required for a link between improvements in the measures of muscle strength and/or physical activity and clinical outcomes to allow development of interventions to improve clinical outcomes in frail older patients. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 321 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 308 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 52 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 44 | 14% |
| Researcher | 34 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 10% |
| Other | 19 | 6% |
| Other | 78 | 24% |
| Unknown | 63 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 115 | 36% |
| Sports and Recreations | 29 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 18 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 4% |
| Other | 42 | 13% |
| Unknown | 86 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 May 2013.
All research outputs
#14,728,447
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#2,205
of 3,596 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,483
of 247,159 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#23
of 48 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,596 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 247,159 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 48 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.