Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23842964›Full record

ReviewCalcified tissue international2013

Tools in the assessment of sarcopenia.

C Cooper, R Fielding, M Visser, L J van Loon, Y Rolland, E Orwoll, K Reid, S Boonen, W Dere, S Epstein and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Calcified tissue international, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03955302 (Ultrasound Assessment of Muscle Architecture Before and After the Implementation of a Physical Exercise Regime in the Water in a Frail Elderly Population), which is not on this map. Cited by 126 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
126citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03955302 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Ultrasound Assessment of Muscle Architecture Before and After the Implementation of a Physical Exercise Regime in the Water in a Frail Elderly Population

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of ValenciaRan2018 to 2019Enrolled41ConditionsFrailty SyndromeArmsExercise
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

126 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Nutrition and physical activity in the prevention and treatment of sarcopenia: systematic review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Smartphone Video-Based Knee Extension Moments During Chair Rise Relate to MRI Measures of Muscle Force-Generating Capacity.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Influence of androgen deprivation therapy on physical performance and muscle strength in prostate cancer patients - a systematic review.Reports of practical oncology and radiotherapy : journal of Greatpoland Cancer Center in Poznan and Polish Society of Radiation Oncology · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

66 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

C CooperMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, UK. cc@mrc.soton.ac.uk
R Fielding
M Visser
L J van Loon
Y Rolland
E Orwoll
K Reid
S Boonen
W Dere
S Epstein
B Mitlak
Y Tsouderos
A A Sayer
R Rizzoli
J Y Reginster
J A Kanis

Funding

Medical Research Council G0400491Medical Research Council MC_U147585819Medical Research Council MC_U147585824Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1014Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1015Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12011/2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review provides a framework for the development of an operational definition of sarcopenia and of the potential end points that might be adopted in clinical trials among older adults. While the clinical relevance of sarcopenia is widely recognized, there is currently no universally accepted definition of the disorder. The development of interventions to alter the natural history of sarcopenia also requires consensus on the most appropriate end points for determining outcomes of clinical importance which might be utilized in intervention studies. We review current approaches to the definition of sarcopenia and the methods used for the assessment of various aspects of physical function in older people. The potential end points of muscle mass, muscle strength, muscle power, and muscle fatigue, as well as the relationships between them, are explored with reference to the availability and practicality of the available methods for measuring these end points in clinical trials. Based on current evidence, none of the four potential outcomes in question is sufficiently comprehensive to recommend as a uniform single outcome in randomized clinical trials. We propose that sarcopenia may be optimally defined (for the purposes of clinical trial inclusion criteria as well as epidemiological studies) using a combination of measures of muscle mass and physical performance. The choice of outcome measures for clinical trials in sarcopenia is more difficult; co-primary outcomes, tailored to the specific intervention in question, may be the best way forward in this difficult but clinically important area.

Indexed as

AgingBody CompositionFatigueFemaleHumansMaleMusclesMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReproducibility of ResultsSarcopeniaTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23842964
PMCPMC3744387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.