standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| contribution | contribution | what the paper claims to add |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| object of study | object_of_study | what the paper is about — the thing it investigates |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| research question | research_question | the question the paper sets itself |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; 3 of 3 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| object_of_study | A WORKING GROUP DEFINING A CONDITION THAT HAD BEEN NAMED FOR TWENTY-ONE YEARS - four European societies convened to give sarcopenia a clinical definition, diagnostic criteria and cut-off points, because it had none Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | object_of_study | the paper's words | |
| research_question | what sarcopenia is, what parameters define it, which variables measure those parameters, at what cut-off points, and how it relates to cachexia, frailty and sarcopenic obesity Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | research_question | the paper's words | |
| contribution | the EWGSOP definition - low muscle mass PLUS low muscle function - with three conceptual stages (presarcopenia, sarcopenia, severe sarcopenia), a primary/secondary category split, a table of cut-off points from the literature, and a gait-speed case-finding algorithm Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | contribution | the paper's words | |
| claim_type | method Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | a term in wide use whose prevalence estimate depends on which definition of it the estimator chose Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | expert-consensus Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: expert-consensus | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | A TERM COINED IN 1989 THAT STILL HAD NO AGREED DEFINITION IN 2010: `In 1989, Irwin Rosenberg proposed the term `SARCOPENIA` (GREEK `SARX` or flesh + `PENIA` or loss) to describe this age-related decrease of muscle mass. Sarcopenia has since been defined as the loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength that occurs with advancing age. However, a widely accepted definition of sarcopenia suitable for use in research and clinical practice is still lacking.` The coinage is dated, attributed and given its etymology, and the gap it left is stated in the next sentence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND THE ABSENCE IS ENUMERATED, INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE ONE: `sarcopenia still has no broadly accepted clinical definition, consensus diagnostic criteria, International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes or treatment guidelines.` A missing ICD code is a missing SLOT IN A CONTROLLED VOCABULARY, listed beside the missing definition as the same kind of lack - the clearest statement in this corpus that a definition and its administrative code are one problem Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND A BETTER TERM WAS REJECTED BECAUSE THE WORSE ONE IS ALREADY KNOWN: `Some have argued that the term dynapenia is better suited to describe age-associated loss of muscle strength and function. However, sarcopenia is already a widely recognised term, so replacing it might lead to further confusion.` THE EXACT MIRROR OF haas2018: Banff DELETED the word `acute` because it confused clinicians; EWGSOP KEPT `sarcopenia`, against a term it concedes is better suited, because replacing it would confuse. Two consensus bodies, opposite decisions, the same reason - and neither decision is about the biology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND THE PREVALENCE RANGE IS ATTRIBUTED TO THE DEFINITION IN ONE SENTENCE: `Depending on the literature definition used for sarcopenia, the prevalence in 60-70-year-olds is reported as 5-13%, while the prevalence ranges from 11 to 50% in people >80 years.` bellomo2004 and hoste2006 each gave a range and left the reader to infer the cause; this paper names it Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND A THRESHOLD SET BY WHAT DATA EXISTED, CALLED ARBITRARY BY THE PAPER ITSELF: `Quotation withheld` The class boundary is where the reference data ran out, and the sentence says which population's absence set it Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[4] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND THE CONVENTION BEHIND EVERY OTHER CUT-OFF IS STATED AS A CHOICE: `EWGSOP recommends use of normative (healthy young adult) rather than other predictive reference populations, with cut-off points at two standard deviations below the mean reference value. More research is urgently needed in order to obtain good reference values for populations around the world.` Two decisions - which population is the reference, and how many SDs below it - and the paper concedes the first is under-supplied Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[5] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | AND THE INTENSION IS DECLARED TOO NARROW, WITH THE REASON: `muscle strength does not depend solely on muscle mass, and the relationship between strength and mass is not linear. Thus, defining sarcopenia only in terms of muscle mass is too narrow and may be of limited clinical value.` The two-criterion rule is derived from a non-linearity rather than asserted Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[6] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| mechanisms | and the category is adopted BECAUSE the causes are unknown, not despite it: `We suggest it may be likewise helpful to recognise sarcopenia as a geriatric syndrome because this view promotes its identification and treatment even when the exact causes remain unknown.` A class chosen for what it lets clinicians do, with the aetiological ignorance stated as part of the justification Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[7] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | THE NEIGHBOURING CONSTRUCTS OVERLAP ASYMMETRICALLY AND ONE IS PART OF THE OTHER'S DEFINITION: `most cachectic individuals are also sarcopenic, but most sarcopenic individuals are not considered cachectic. Sarcopenia is one of the elements of the proposed definition for cachexia.` A concept that is a COMPONENT OF ANOTHER CONCEPT'S DEFINITION while also being distinguished from it - the corpus has no edge type for `is part of the definition of`, only for parts of things Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | AND FRAILTY OVERLAPS IT WHILE EXTENDING BEYOND IT: `Frailty and sarcopenia overlap; most frail older people exhibit sarcopenia, and some older people with sarcopenia are also frail. The general concept of frailty, however, goes beyond physical factors to encompass psychological and social dimensions as well.` Overlap without containment in either direction, said in one sentence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | and there is no standard outcome to test a treatment against: `only a handful of clinical trials are under way to test potential sarcopenia treatments. The absence of standardised primary outcomes is a major challenge for the design of such studies.` The definition is proposed so that trials become possible, and the paper says in the same paragraph that the outcomes for those trials do not exist either Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | and the stages are labelled CONCEPTUAL, with presarcopenia reachable only by an instrument most clinics do not have: `This stage can only be identified by techniques that measure muscle mass accurately and in reference to standard populations` - so the first stage of the classification is, in practice, unobservable wherever the reference populations are the ones the paper says are missing Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | requiring BOTH low muscle mass and low muscle function for the diagnosis, rather than mass alone Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: a definition that the paper argues is too narrow, on the grounds that 'muscle strength does not depend solely on muscle mass, and the relationship between strength and mass is not linear' · outcome: held | controls[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | normative (healthy young adult) reference populations rather than predictive ones, with cut-offs two standard deviations below the mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: cut-off points that drift with whichever study population happens to be at hand · outcome: partial | controls[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| controls | the primary/secondary split by whether a cause other than ageing is evident Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: treating disease-, activity- and nutrition-related muscle loss as age-related sarcopenia · outcome: partial | controls[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | sarcopenia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sarcopenia | concepts[0] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | syndrome Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: syndrome | concepts[1] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | cachexia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: cachexia | concepts[2] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | dynapenia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: dynapenia | concepts[3] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | primary sarcopenia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: primary sarcopenia | concepts[4] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | secondary sarcopenia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: secondary sarcopenia | concepts[5] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | frailty Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: frailty | concepts[6] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| senses | `sarcopenia` (Rosenberg 1989) - the COINAGE: Greek `sarx` (flesh) + `penia` (loss), for the age-related decrease of muscle MASS alone Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | `sarcopenia` (EWGSOP 2010) - MASS PLUS FUNCTION: `a syndrome characterised by progressive and generalised loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength`, diagnosed as `low muscle mass PLUS low muscle strength or low physical performance`. The 1989 sense is declared `too narrow` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | `dynapenia` - the term EWGSOP concedes is `better suited to describe age-associated loss of muscle strength and function`, and declines to adopt because `sarcopenia is already a widely recognised term` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | `primary` vs `secondary sarcopenia` - the same condition split by whether a cause OTHER THAN AGEING is evident; the paper adds that in many older people the aetiology is multi-factorial so neither label applies Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | `presarcopenia` / `sarcopenia` / `severe sarcopenia` - three CONCEPTUAL stages by how many of the three criteria are met Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[4] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | extends → Rosenberg's 1989 coinage of 'sarcopenia' for the age-related decrease of muscle mass - this paper keeps the name and widens the intension to require function Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | critiques → the literature's definitions of sarcopenia by muscle mass alone, which the paper calls 'too narrow and may be of limited clinical value' Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | sarcopenia —distinct-from→ cachexia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: 'most cachectic…' Distinct, asymmetrically overlapping, and one is a component of the other's DEFINITION - which the schema cannot say, so it is in the note · the relation stated: the overlap runs ONE WAY: most cachectic individuals are sarcopenic, most sarcopenic individuals are not cachectic also in: sarcopenia · cachexia | concept_edges[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | sarcopenia —is-a→ syndrome Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: Weight 0.9, not 0.95: 'syndrome' is a broad endpoint, and the paper's sharper claim is the narrower class 'GERIATRIC syndrome', argued separately and adopted BECAUSE the causes are unknown - 'this view promotes…' · the relation stated: 'Sarcopenia is a syndrome characterised by ...' - the working definition's own opening clause also in: sarcopenia · syndrome | concept_edges[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | primary sarcopenia —distinct-from→ secondary sarcopenia Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. the relation itself is separately evidenced · strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: `Sarcopenia can be considered `primary` (or age-related) when no other cause is evident but ageing itself, while sarcopenia can be considered `secondary` when one or more other causes are evident.` The split is by AETIOLOGY, not by presentation - and the paper immediately concedes that `in many older people the aetiology is multi-factorial so that it may not be possible to characterise each individual as having a primary or secondary condition` · the relation stated: one condition split by whether a cause OTHER THAN AGEING is evident also in: primary sarcopenia · secondary sarcopenia | concept_edges[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A TERM COINED IN 1989 AND STILL UNDEFINED IN 2010: `In 1989, Irwin Rosenberg proposed the term `SARCOPENIA` ... However, a widely accepted definition of sarcopenia suitable for use in research and clinical practice is still lacking` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | AND NO ICD CODE EITHER, LISTED BESIDE THE MISSING DEFINITION AS THE SAME KIND OF LACK: `sarcopenia still has no broadly accepted clinical definition, consensus diagnostic criteria, International Classification of Diseases 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes or treatment guidelines` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | dynapenia may better describe age-associated loss of strength, but sarcopenia is kept as already widely recognised Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | THE PREVALENCE RANGE ATTRIBUTED TO THE DEFINITION IN ONE SENTENCE: `Depending on the literature definition used for sarcopenia, the prevalence in 60-70-year-olds is reported as 5-13%, while the prevalence ranges from 11 to 50% in people >80 years` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | A THRESHOLD SET BY WHICH POPULATION HAD NO REFERENCE DATA, AND CALLED ARBITRARY: `Because population norms for young adult blacks and whites are not currently available, the gender-specific 20th percentile was arbitrarily chosen as the cut-off point for each method` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | AND THE NEIGHBOURING CONSTRUCT CONTAINS THIS ONE IN ITS DEFINITION WHILE BEING DISTINCT FROM IT: `most cachectic individuals are also sarcopenic, but most sarcopenic individuals are not considered cachectic. Sarcopenia is one of the elements of the proposed definition for cachexia` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `a syndrome characterised by progressive and generalised loss of skeletal muscle mass and strength with a risk of adverse outcomes such as physical disability, poor quality of life and death`, diagnosed as LOW MUSCLE MASS PLUS low muscle strength or low physical performance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sarcopenia | content_tags.definitions[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `Greek `SARX` or flesh + `PENIA` or loss`, coined `to describe this age-related decrease of muscle mass` - mass only, and declared too narrow in this paper Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: sarcopenia | content_tags.definitions[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `low muscle mass without impact on muscle strength or physical performance. This stage can only be identified by techniques that measure muscle mass accurately and in reference to standard populations` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: presarcopenia | content_tags.definitions[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `Depending on the literature definition used` - the range is attributed to the definition, not to the populations Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the same sentence, the same attribution - a fourfold spread on one construct Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `More research is urgently needed in order to obtain good reference values for populations around the world` - the rule is stated and the data it needs is declared missing in the same paragraph Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | `Because population norms for young adult blacks and whites are not currently available` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the instrument of the class boundary: two SDs below a normative mean is what makes a measurement `low`, so the reference population chooses the diagnosis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standard deviation | content_tags.statistics[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the 1989 definition's only variable, and the one this paper says is not enough on its own Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: muscle mass | content_tags.variables[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | the added variable, justified by a NON-LINEARITY: `the relationship between strength and mass is not linear` Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: muscle strength | content_tags.variables[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.