ArticleJournal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls2022
Identification of Probable sarcopenia based on SARC-F and SARC-CalF in older adults from a low-resource setting.
Article in Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Prevalence of sarcopenia and dynapenia among institutionalized older adults in the Lisbon region: associations with sex, nutritional status and body composition.BMC nutrition · 2026Article
- A comparative analysis of sarcopenia screening methods in Thai people with type 2 diabetes mellitus in an outpatient setting.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Association Between Oral Health and Probable Sarcopenia in Older Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Effects of an Oral Nutritional Supplementation and Physical Exercise Intervention on Older Adults at Risk for Sarcopenia.Journal of frailty, sarcopenia and falls · 2024Article
- Clinical considerations for sarcopenia in older Colombian Afro-descendant and mestizo women.The Journal of international medical research · 2023Article
- Prospective sarcopenia outcomes associated with physical performance in individuals aged 55 years and over in Malaysia.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Comparison Between the Clinical Effect of Percutaneous Kyphoplasty for Osteoporosis Vertebral Compression Fracture Patient with or Without Sarcopenia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a Sarcopenia Geriatric Scale (SARCO-GS): a new short scale for the screening of sarcopenia.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Analysis of SARC-F and SARCCalF accuracy in assessing sarcopenia risk on older adults with cardiovascular diseases admitted to a referral hospital: A cross-sectional study.Brazilian journal of physical therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: We aimed to investigate the frequency of probable sarcopenia and to compare the performance of SARC-F and SARC-CalF for detecting this condition in outpatient older adults from a low-resource setting. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional study in outpatient older adults aged ≥60 years attending a hospital in Peru, between August 2019 and February 2020. Probable sarcopenia was defined as low handgrip strength (<27 kg in men and <16 in women). We used SARC-F and SARC-CalF with their standard cut-off points (≥4 and ≥11, respectively). Low calf circumference was defined as ≤33 cm in women and ≤34 cm in men. We performed sensitivity and specificity analyses. Results: We included 206 older adults, 102 (49.5%) aged ≥75 years old and 140 (67.9%) females. Probable sarcopenia was present in 36.40% of the participants. SARC-F ≥4 was observed in 29.61% and SARC-CalF ≥11 in 41.26% of the population. SARC-F≥4 showed 41.33% sensitivity and 77.10% specificity, whereas SARC-Calf ≥11 had 50.67% sensitivity and 64.12% specificity. Conclusion: We found that one out of three of the population had probable sarcopenia. SARC-Calf showed superior but still low sensitivity than SARC-F, while both had moderate specificity and thus may be useful for ruling out the disease in clinical practice.
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.