Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37892780›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Estimation of Sarcopenia Indices in Women from Saudi Arabia in Relation to Menopause and Obesity: Cross-Sectional Comparative Study.

Nouf Aljawini, Syed Shahid Habib

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

Nouf AljawiniDepartment of Physiology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh 11416, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-5088-7792
Syed Shahid HabibDepartment of Physiology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, Riyadh 11416, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-5944-8406

Funding

King Saud University King Saud University
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sarcopenia prevalence depends on the definition, and ethnicity must be considered when setting reference values. However, there is no specific cut-off for sarcopenia in Saudi women. Accordingly, we aimed to establish a cut-off value for sarcopenia in Saudi women. We determined the prevalence of sarcopenia in terms of low handgrip strength (HGS) in postmenopausal women using the EWGSOP2 value, redefined a specific cut-off for low HGS derived from Saudi premenopausal women, re-determined the prevalence of low HGS using the new cut-off, and analyzed the proportion of low HGS in women with obesity compared to those without obesity. Following EWGSOP2 guidelines, we defined probable sarcopenia and set new HGS values. We assessed HGS and body composition in 134 pre/postmenopausal women. Probable sarcopenia prevalence was calculated using EWGSOP2's HGS of 16 kg and new cut-offs from young premenopausal women without obesity. HGS 10 and 8 kg cut-offs were calculated from premenopausal Saudi women's mean -2 SDs and mean -2.5 SDs. Using the HGS 16 kg cut-off, sarcopenia prevalence was 44% in postmenopausal and 33.89% in premenopausal women. Applying the new HGS 10 kg and 8 kg cut-offs, the prevalence was 9.33% and 4%, respectively, in postmenopausal and 5% and 3.40%, respectively, in premenopausal women. Women with obesity had a higher proportion of low HGS across all cut-offs. We suggest that EWGSOP2 cut-offs may not be adaptable for Saudi women. Considering body composition differences between Saudis and Caucasians, our proposed HGS cut-offs appear more relevant.

Indexed as

cut-offEWGSOP2handgrip strengthmenopauseobesityprevalenceprobable sarcopeniasarcopeniaSaudi Arabiawomen

Identifiers

PMID37892780
PMCPMC10607446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.