ArticlePloS one2020
Polish version of SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in older adults: An examination of reliability and validity.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between age-related sensory impairment with sarcopenia and its related components in older adults: a systematic review.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2022Pooled it
- Translation of the strength, assistance in walking, rising from a chair, climbing stairs, and falls questionnaire into Hindi.World journal of methodology · 2026Article
- Optimizing sarcopenia screening in type 2 diabetes mellitus: A ROC curve evaluation of the SARC-F and the SARC-CalF.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2025Article
- Reliability and Clinical Validity of the SARC-Global Questionnaire for Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Obesity in Spanish Older Adults.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Arabic Adaptation and Validation of the SARC-F Questionnaire for Sarcopenia Screening in Elderly Populations: Exploration of Associated Factors.Journal of aging research · 2025Article
- Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Portuguese Version of the SARC-F in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of Diagnostic Value of the SARC-F and Its Four Modified Versions in Polish Community-Dwelling Older Adults.Clinical interventions in aging · 2023Article
- Article
- Validation of the Italian Version of the SARC-F Questionnaire to Assess Sarcopenia in Older Adults.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Malnutrition, Sarcopenia, and Malnutrition-Sarcopenia Syndrome in Older Adults with COPD.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Utility of the SARC-F Questionnaire for Sarcopenia Screening in Patients with Chronic Liver Disease: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in Japan.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Article
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
introductionSARC-F is a quick questionnaire recommended as a screening tool for sarcopenia. The aim of the study was to translate, adapt, and validate the Polish version of the SARC-F for community-dwelling older adults in Poland. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe included 160 Polish volunteers aged ≥ 60 years (44% of men). The Polish version of SARC-F was adapted following standardized forward-backward translation procedure. SARC-F was validated against the six sets of diagnostic criteria as the reference standards [developed independently by European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People1 (EWGSOP1), European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People2 (EWGSOP2), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Sarcopenia Project, Asia Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS), the International Working Group for Sarcopenia (IWGS), and Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders (SCWD)].
resultsSARC-F score ≥ 4 points was observed in 18.8% of the study population. Cronbach's alpha was 0.70. The sensitivity of SARC-F varied from 33.3% to 50.0% depending on the diagnostics criteria used, while the specificity was about 85%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was low (about 30%) for five out of six sets of the diagnostic criteria used (EWGSOP2, IWGS, AWGS, FNIH, and SCWD), while the negative predictive value (NPV) was generally high (>88%). The area under the ROC curves (AUC) was 0.652-0.728. SARC-F had the largest AUC against FNIH criteria (0.728), indicating a moderate diagnostic accuracy. Similar results were found for EWGSOP2 and IWGS criteria. The AUC values were below 0.7 for AWGS, SCWD, and EWGSOP1 criteria.
conclusionBased on the results, the Polish version of SARC-F shows excellent reliability and good internal consistency. High specificity and high NPV make SARC-F a useful tool to rule-out sarcopenia with high accuracy in community-dwelling older adults, independently of the diagnostic criteria used.
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.