Cited by 56Nutrition and Health in AgingBody Composition Measurement TechniquesFrailty in Older Adults

Sarcopenic obesity and overall mortality: results from the application of novel models of body composition phenotypes to the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2004

Open access
Van Aller, Carla, Lara, Jose, Stephan, Blossom C.M., Donini, Lorenzo Maria, Heymsfield, Steven, Katzmarzyk, Peter T., Wells, Jonathan C.K., Prado, Carla M. +1 more·2019·Clinical Nutrition

Abstract

Background/objectives There is no consensus on the definition of sarcopenic obesity (SO), resulting in inconsistent associations of SO with mortality risk. We aim to evaluate association of dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) SO models with mortality risk in a US adult population (≥50 years).Subjects/methods The study population consisted of 3577 participants aged 50 years and older from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition and Examination Survey with mortality follow-up data through December 31, 2011. Difference in survival time in people with and without SO defined by three body composition DXA models (Model 1: body composition phenotype model; Model 2: Truncal Fat Mass (TrFM)/Appendicular Skeletal Muscle Mass (ASM) ratio model; Model 3: Fat Mass (FM)/Fat Free Mass (FFM) ratio). The differences between the models were assessed by the acceleration failure time model, and expressed as time ratios (TR).Results Participants age 50-70 years with SO had a significantly decreased survival time, according to the body composition phenotype model (TR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87-0.97), and TrFM/ASM ratio model (TR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.81-0.95). The FM/FFM ratio model did not detect significant differences in survival time. Participants with SO aged 70 years and older did not have a significantly decreased survival time, according to all three models.Conclusions A SO phenotype increases mortality risk in people of age 50-70 years, but not in people aged 70 years and older. The application of the body composition phenotype and the TrFM/ASM ratio models may represent useful diagnostic approaches to improve the prediction of disease and mortality risk.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.clnu.2018.01.022

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Studies by Siervo et al. showed that the ratio of visceral fat mass to appendicular skeletal muscle index is a better predictor of mortality and diabetes risk than the simple fat mass to fat-free mass ratio.

    “Among available examples, studies conducted by Siervo et al [6,108] have shown that the ratio of visceral FM/ASMI is a better predictor of mortality and diabetes risk compared to the more simple FM/FFM ratio.”

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 48 · Cited by 56

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Franca NAG, Peters BSE, Lima MMS, Santos EA, Santos PC, Martini LA. Muscle mass as the main component of body composition associated with bone mineral density. Osteoporos Int 2017;28:S210e1.

Authors
Van Aller, C., Lara, J., Stephan, B. C. M., Donini, L. M., Heymsfield, S., Katzmarzyk, P. T., Wells, J. C. K., Prado, C. M., & Siervo, M.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • Sapienza University of Rome (IT)
  • Pennington Biomedical Research Center (US)
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
Corresponding author
Siervo, Mario
Venue
Clinical Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
264-270
ISSN
0261-5614 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2789291111
Cited by
56
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.63
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Clinical Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • IRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (submittedVersion)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MR/N007921/1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
sarcopenic obesity, all-cause mortality, body composition phenotypes, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, appendicular skeletal muscle mass, fat mass to fat-free mass ratio, sarcopenia, older adults, mortality prediction
MeSH terms
Aged, Body Composition, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Obesity, Phenotype, Risk Factors, United States, Absorptiometry, Photon, Comorbidity, Sarcopenia

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