Trial reportScientific reports2020
A randomized controlled trial of resistance and balance exercise for sarcopenic patients aged 80-99 years.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of exercise in older adults with sarcopenia.Scientific reports · 2026Pooled it
- Exercise for sarcopenia in older people: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2023Pooled it
- Effects of 12-week whole-body vibration training versus resistance training in older people with sarcopenia.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Sarcopenia in cognitive disorders: Toward a shared pathophysiological framework.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2026Review
- Towards a core outcome set for sarcopenia intervention studies: a scoping review identifying the most frequently reported outcomes across randomized controlled trials in sarcopenia.European geriatric medicine · 2025Article
- Unravelling the Complexity of Sarcopenia Through a Systems Biology Approach.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Deepening Physical Exercise Intervention Protocols for Older People with Sarcopenia Following Establishment of the EWGSOP2 Consensus: A Systematic Review.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Association between skeletal muscle mass and the prognosis of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a retrospective study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Prevention of Sarcopenia.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2025Review
- Gut-muscle axis crosstalk in age-related sarcopenia: mechanisms and therapeutic targets.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
- Physical exercise for primary sarcopenia: an expert opinion.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2025Review
- Features of effective hospital fall prevention trials: an intervention component analysis.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Design of contents for developing an intervention app for sarcopenia in older adults: A research study using the Delphi technique.Journal of Korean gerontological nursing · 2024Article
- Impact of sarcopenia on the prognosis of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with antiangiogenic therapy: A propensity score matching analysis.Thoracic cancer · 2024Article
- Effect of Different Exercise Interventions on Grip Strength, Knee Extensor Strength, Appendicular Skeletal Muscle Index, and Skeletal Muscle Index Strength in Patients with Sarcopenia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Chinese expert consensus on prevention and intervention for elderly with sarcopenia (2023).Aging medicine (Milton (N.S.W)) · 2023Article
- Sarcopenia and Cardiovascular Diseases.Circulation · 2023Review
- Shared decision making in sarcopenia treatment.Frontiers in public health · 2023Review
- A review of the components of exercise prescription for sarcopenic older adults.European geriatric medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared a mixed exercise program (i.e., balance exercise plus resistance exercise) with resistance exercise in a single-blind, randomized controlled trial in a post-acute care unit. In total, 60 sarcopenic patients were randomly assigned to an intervention group (12-week mixed exercise) and a control group (12-week resistance exercise). The primary outcomes were the change of the Barthel Index and the number of fallers. The intervention group showed a mean increase of 9.5 points on the Barthel Index (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9-15.1), while the control group showed a mean increase of 6.3 points (95% CI 2.3-10.4). The mixed exercise program provided a significant benefit over resistance exercise (adjusted mean difference of the change of Barthel Index: 6.8 points; 95% CI 1.4-12.1). The number of fallers was 13.3% and 23.3% in the intervention and control groups, respectively, but the difference was not significant (risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.13, p = 0.506). In conclusion, compared with resistance exercise, the mixed exercise program appears to further improve the activities of daily living and physical performance in our study population. Under the monitoring of experienced physiotherapists, both exercise programs are feasible and safe for this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.