ArticleAsia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition2024
Validity of the modified versions of SARC-F+EBM for sarcopenia screening and diagnosis in China: the PPLSS study.
Article in Asia Pacific journal of clinical nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesIt is recommended by Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia to early identify people at risk for sarcopenia using simple screening tools like SARC-F. The modified version SARC-F+EBM showed higher diagnostic performance. However, this cut-off value of body mass index (BMI) remained uncertain to be used in Chinese population. In this study, we used appropriate BMI recommended for Chinese older population and further modified SARC-F+EBM by combining calf circumference. METHODS AND STUDY
designDiagnostic tests were performed and the receiver operating characteristics analyses were conducted between the SARC-F, SARC-F+EBM (cut-off of BMI: ≤ 21 kg/m2), SARC-F+EBM (CN) (cut-off of BMI: ≤ 22 kg/m2), SARC-CalF and SARC-CalF+EBM (CN) (cut-off of BMI: ≤ 22 kg/m2) in 1660 community-dwelling participants aged ≥ 65 years from China.
resultsThe participants had an average age of 71.7±5.1 years, of which 56.8% were women. All the modified models could enhance the areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of original SARC-F (all p<0.001). The SARC-F+EBM (CN) also showed a significantly higher sensitivity of 47.4% (p<0.001) and an AUC of 0.809 (p=0.005) than SARC-F+EBM. SARC-CalF+EBM (CN) was validated to be of great diagnostic value of the highest AUC of 0.88 among these sarcopenia screening tools, including SARC-F, SARC-CalF and SARC-F+EBM (CN) (all p<0.001). Using this study population as a reference, the optimal cut-off value of SARC-CalF+EBM (CN) is ≥12 points, with a sensitivity of 79.3% and a specificity of 80.7%.
conclusionsThe SARC-F+EBM (CN) and SARC-CalF+EBM (CN) could enhance the diagnostic performance of SARC-F and SARC-F+EBM and are suitable sarcopenia screening tools for Chinese 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.