The impact of sarcopenia on a physical activity intervention: The lifestyle interventions and independence for elders pilot study (LIFE-P)
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if sarcopenia modulates the response to a physical activity intervention in functionally limited older adults. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Three academic centers. PARTICIPANTS: Elders aged 70 to 89 years at risk for mobility disability who underwent dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) for body composition at enrollment and follow-up at twelve months (N = 177). INTERVENTION: Subjects participated in a physical activity program (PA) featuring aerobic, strength, balance, and flexibility training, or a successful aging (SA) educational program about healthy aging. MEASUREMENTS: Sarcopenia as determined by measuring appendicular lean mass and adjusting for height and total body fat mass (residuals method), Short Physical Performance Battery score (SPPB), and gait speed determined on 400 meter course. RESULTS: At twelve months, sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic subjects in PA tended to have higher mean SPPB scores (8.7±0.5 and 8.7±0.2 points) compared to sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic subjects in SA (8.3±0.5 and 8.4±0.2 points, p = 0.24 and 0.10), although the differences were not statistically significant. At twelve months, faster mean gait speeds were observed in PA: 0.93±0.4 and 0.95±0.03 meters/second in sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic PA subjects, and 0.89±0.4 and 0.91±0.03 meters/second in sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic SA subjects (p = 0.98 and 0.26), although not statistically significant. There was no difference between the sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic groups in intervention adherence or number of adverse events. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that older adults with sarcopenia, who represent a vulnerable segment of the elder population, are capable of improvements in physical performance after a physical activity intervention.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In a secondary subset analysis of the LIFE pilot study, the short physical performance battery of patients with sarcopenia improved from 7.4 to 8.7 compared with the successful ageing group.
“the short physical performance battery — an objective assessment tool for the evaluation of lower extremity function (higher score equals better function)284 — of patients with sarcopenia improved from 7.4 to 8.7 when compared with the successful ageing group285”
From Sarcopenic obesity in older adults: aetiology, epidemiology and treatment strategies (2018) · cites this paper as [285]
The Results section, “Analysis of SPPB” (page unavailable), reports a 12-month SPPB score of 8.7 for sarcopenic participants in the physical-activity group and compares that group with the successful-aging group. Our copy does not establish the claimed starting score of 7.4. The reported difference between groups at 12 months was not statistically significant. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 33 · Cited by 90
- Authors
- Liu, C. K., Leng, X., Hsu, F.-C., Kritchevsky, S. B., Ding, J., Earnest, C. P., Ferrucci, L., Goodpaster, B. H., Guralnik, J. M., Lenchik, L., Pahor, M., & Fielding, R. A.
- Affiliations
- Boston University (US)
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- University of Bath (GB)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- University of Pittsburgh (US)
- University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Christine K.
- Fielding, R.A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- The Journal of nutrition, health and aging
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-01
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 59-64
- ISSN
- 1279-7707 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4111145
- OpenAlex
- W2024550458
- Cited by
- 90
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 4.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The journal of nutrition health & aging (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5p30ag031679-15)
- U.S. Public Health Service (D01HP08796)
- National Institute on Aging (U01AG022376, 1 P30 AG031679, K24AG021507, P30-AG031679, P30AG024827, P30AG028740, P30AG021332)
- National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR029890)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Keywords
- sarcopenia, physical activity interventions, older adults, functional limitations, successful aging, physical performance, walking speed, Short Physical Performance Battery, appendicular lean mass, body composition, mobility impairment, resistance training, balance training, intervention adherence
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Body Composition, Female, Gait, Humans, Life Style, Male, Physical Fitness, Pilot Projects, Exercise, Absorptiometry, Photon, Geriatric Assessment, Mobility Limitation, Sarcopenia, Independent Living
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review