Appendicular Skeletal Muscle Mass in Older Adults Can Be Estimated With a Simple Equation Using a Few Zero-Cost Variables
Abstract
Background and purpose Assessing appendicular skeletal muscle (ASM) mass is crucial for the diagnosis of numerous pathologies related to the decline of muscle mass in old age, such as sarcopenia, malnutrition, or cachexia. The dual-energy X-ray absorptiometer (DEXA) radiological technique, which is the gold standard for its assessment, is particularly costly and not routinely used in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to derive computationally simple equations capable of estimating the DEXA-measured ASM at zero cost in older adult populations. Methods We used the cross-sectional data collected by the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) over 7 years (1999-2006). The study sample included 16,477 individuals aged 18 years and over, of which 4401 were over 60 years old. We considered 38 nonlaboratory variables. For the derivation of the equations, we employed the Brain Project, an innovative artificial intelligence tool that combines genetic programming and neural networks. The approach searches simultaneously for the mathematical expression and the variables to use in the equation. The derived equations are useful to estimate the DEXA-measured ASM. Results and discussion A simple equation that includes the body weight of the patient as the sole variable can estimate the outcome of DEXA with an accuracy equivalent to previously published equations. When used to identify individuals over 60 years old with muscle mass loss, it achieved an area under…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
NHANES data has supported the creation of innovative AI-driven screening tools for sarcopenia and muscle mass assessment, demonstrating that anthropometric measurements can effectively substitute costly radiological examinations whilst maintaining high diagnostic accuracy.
“Furthermore, NHANES data has supported the creation of innovative AI-driven screening tools for sarcopenia and muscle mass assessment, demonstrating how anthropometric measurements can effectively substitute costly radiological examinations whilst maintaining high diagnostic accuracy (66,67).”
From Generative artificial intelligence in predictive analysis of diabetes and its complications: a narrative review (2025) · cites this paper as [67]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 33 · Cited by 17
- Authors
- Buccheri, E., Dell’Aquila, D., Russo, M., Chiaramonte, R., & Vecchio, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Catania (IT)
- Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Buccheri, Enrico
- Venue
- Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy
- Published
- 2024-09-18
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- E149-E158
- ISSN
- 1539-8412 (ISSN-L)
- 2152-0895
- OpenAlex
- W4401125029
- Cited by
- 17
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 4.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
- Keywords
- appendicular skeletal muscle mass, muscle mass assessment, sarcopenia, older adults, body weight, anthropometric variables, genetic programming, artificial neural networks, low-cost screening, muscle mass loss, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nutrition Surveys, Absorptiometry, Photon, Muscle, Skeletal, 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