ReviewEuropean geriatric medicine2024
Cut-off points for knee extension strength: identifying muscle weakness in older adults.
Review in European geriatric medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Impact of Body Composition Analysis on Quality of Life and Anxiety-Depression in Adult Males with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Kratopenia as an indicator of sarcopenia in smokers: Cut-off points for peak knee torque.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
purposeGeneralized muscle weakness is the primary characteristic of sarcopenia. Handgrip strength (HGS) is widely employed to detect muscle weakness. However, knee extension strength (KES) declines much earlier and more pronounced than HGS, and there is a stronger correlation between KES and functional performance. Therefore, KES may be a more appropriate proxy for identifying muscle weakness compared to HGS. The purpose of this review was to clarify the KES measurement towards a standardized approach and summarize the cut-off points for KES.
methodsA literature search was conducted in Web of Science, PubMed, Elsevier, Scopus and Medline databased up to July 10th, 2023.
resultsA total of 12 articles were ultimately included in this review, which proposed various cut-off points for KES. Notably, these studies exhibited high heterogeneities, including diverse living settings for participants, KES measurement, methods for KES normalization, methodologies for determining cut-off points and study designs.
conclusionsNo consensus on cut-off points for KES was reached due to the heterogeneities in KES measurement and normalized methods among studies. To enhance the comparability among studies and facilitate the sarcopenia screening framework, a standardized approach for KES measurement and KES normalization are needed. Regarding KES measurement, the hand-held dynamometer-based isometric KES is easy to access and ideally suited for both clinical and community settings, while isokinetic KES, representing the gold standard, is preferred for research settings. Additionally, it is suggested to normalize isometric KES to body weight (BW), while normalizing isokinetic KES to allometrically scaled BW.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38926333What 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.