↓ Skip to main content

Strength measures are better than muscle mass measures in predicting health-related outcomes in older people: time to abandon the term sarcopenia?

Overview of attention for article published in Osteoporosis International, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
37 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
291 Mendeley
Title
Strength measures are better than muscle mass measures in predicting health-related outcomes in older people: time to abandon the term sarcopenia?
Published in
Osteoporosis International, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00198-016-3691-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. C. Menant, F. Weber, J. Lo, D. L. Sturnieks, J. C. Close, P. S. Sachdev, H. Brodaty, S. R. Lord

Abstract

There is no clear consensus on definition, cut-points or standardised assessments of sarcopenia. We found a lower limb strength assessment was at least as effective in predicting balance, mobility and falls in 419 older people as muscle mass-based measures of sarcopenia. There is currently no consensus on the definition, cut-points or standardised assessments of sarcopenia. This study aimed to investigate whether several published definitions of sarcopenia differentiate between older people with respect to important functional and health outcomes. Four hundred nineteen community-living older adults (mean age 81.2 ± 4.5, 49 % female) completed assessments of body composition (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry), strength, balance, mobility and disability. Falls were recorded prospectively for a year using monthly calendars. Sarcopenia was defined according to four skeletal mass-based definitions, two strength-based definitions (handgrip or knee extensor force) and a consensus algorithm (low mass and low strength or slow gait speed). Obesity was defined according to percentage fat mass or waist circumference. The four skeletal mass-based definitions varied considerably with respect to the percentage of participants classified as sarcopenic and their predictive accuracy for functional and health outcomes. The knee extension strength-based definition was equivalent to or better than the mass-based and consensus algorithm definitions; i.e. weaker participants performed poorly in tests of leaning balance, stepping reaction time, gait speed and mobility. They also had higher physiological fall risk scores and were 43 % more likely to fall at home than their stronger counterparts. Adding obesity to sarcopenia definitions identified participants with greater self-reported disability. A simple lower limb strength assessment was at least as effective in predicting balance, functional mobility and falls in older people as more expensive and time-consuming muscle mass-based measures. These findings imply that functional terms such as muscle weakness or motor impairment are preferable to sarcopenia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 37 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 291 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 289 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 45 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 13%
Student > Bachelor 29 10%
Researcher 26 9%
Student > Postgraduate 15 5%
Other 53 18%
Unknown 85 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 63 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 43 15%
Sports and Recreations 21 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 3%
Social Sciences 9 3%
Other 31 11%
Unknown 115 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 03 December 2017.
All research outputs
#1,115,702
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#153
of 3,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,038
of 354,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#4
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,595 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
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 354,176 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.