ArticleNutrients2024
Prognostic Value of New Sarcopenia Screening Tool in the Elderly-SARC-GLOBAL.
Article in Nutrients, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Assessment tools for patients with stroke-related sarcopenia: a scoping review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Association between triglyceride-cholesterol-body weight index and sarcopenia in the older adults from China: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Reliability and Clinical Validity of the SARC-Global Questionnaire for Sarcopenia and Sarcopenic Obesity in Spanish Older Adults.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Association between the non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio and sarcopenia: evidence from CHARLS.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Association between non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio and sarcopenia based on NHANES.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sarcopenia screening tools have a low capacity to predict adverse outcomes that are consequences of sarcopenia in the elderly population. This study aimed to evaluate the ability of a new sarcopenia screening tool SARC-GLOBAL to predict negative clinical outcomes in the elderly. A total of 395 individuals were evaluated in a 42-month period. The screening tools SARC-GLOBAL, SARC-F, and SARC-CalF and the diagnosis of sarcopenia according to European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older Persons (EWGSOP2) were performed at the beginning of the study. Logistic and Poisson regression models were applied to assess the predictive value of the tools for the odds and risks of negative clinical outcomes, respectively. The most common negative clinical outcome in the followed population was falls (12.9%), followed by infections (12.4%), hospitalizations (11.8%), fractures (4.3%), and deaths (2.7%). Both SARC-GLOBAL and SARC-F were similar in predicting the odds of falls and hospitalizations during the follow up period, however SARC-CalF only predicted the odds of hospitalizations at 42 months.
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.