Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28220197›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2017

Prevalence of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity in older German men using recognized definitions: high accordance but low overlap!

W Kemmler, M Teschler, A Weißenfels, C Sieber, E Freiberger, S von Stengel

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 3 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

39 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

W KemmlerInstitute of Medical Physics (IMP), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Henkestrasse 91, 91052, Erlangen, Germany. wolfgang.kemmler@imp.uni-erlangen.de.
M TeschlerInstitute of Medical Physics (IMP), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Henkestrasse 91, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.
A WeißenfelsInstitute of Medical Physics (IMP), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Henkestrasse 91, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.
C SieberInstitute of Biomedicine of Aging (IBA), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kobergerstrasse 60, 90408, Nürnberg, Germany.
E FreibergerInstitute of Biomedicine of Aging (IBA), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kobergerstrasse 60, 90408, Nürnberg, Germany.
S von StengelInstitute of Medical Physics (IMP), Friedrich-Alexander University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Henkestrasse 91, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relevance of sarcopenia and sarcopenic Obesity (SO) is rising in our aging societies. Applying recognized definitions to 965 community-dwelling Bavarian men 70 years+ resulted in a prevalence for sarcopenia between 3.7 and 4.9 and between 2.1 and 4.1% for SO. Despite this high consistency, the overlap between the definitions/approaches was <50%.

introductionThe relevance of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) is rising steadily in the aging societies of most developed nations. However, different definitions, components, and cutoff points hinder the evaluation of the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO. The purpose of this contribution was to determine the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO in a cohort of community-dwelling German men 70+ applying established sarcopenia (European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People, Foundation National Institute of Health, International Working Group on Sarcopenia) and obesity definitions. Further, we addressed the overlap between the definitions.

methodsAltogether, 965 community-dwelling men 70 years and older living in Northern Bavaria, Germany, were assessed during the screening phase of the Franconian Sarcopenic Obesity project. Segmental multi-frequency bio-impedance analysis (BIA) was applied to determine weight and body composition.

resultsApplying the definitions of EWGSOP, IWGS, and FNIH, 4.9, 3.8, and 3.7% of the total cohort were classified as sarcopenic, respectively. When further applying body fat to diagnose obesity, SO prevalence in the total cohort ranged from 4.1% (EWGSOP + body fat >25%) to 2.1% (IWGS + body fat >30%). Despite the apparently high consistency of the approaches with respect to prevalence, the overlap in individual sarcopenia diagnosis between the sarcopenia definitions was rather low (<50%).

conclusionThe prevalence of sarcopenia and SO in community-dwelling German men 70 years+ is relatively low (<5%) independently of the definition used. However, consistency of individual sarcopenia diagnosis varies considerably between the three definitions. Since sarcopenia is now recognized as an independent condition by the International Classification of Diseases, a mandatory definition must be stated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT2857660.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnthropometryBody CompositionGaitGermanyHand StrengthHumansMaleObesityPrevalenceReference ValuesSarcopeniaYoung Adult70+GermanyMenPrevalenceSarcopeniaSarcopenic obesity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.