ReviewFrontiers in physiology2025
Effect of five non-invasive treatments on body composition, physical function and quality of life in elderly sarcopenia: a network meta-analysis of 22 randomized controlled trials.
Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: While exercise interventions are widely used for sarcopenia management, the comparative efficacy of different non-invasive treatments remains unclear. This network meta-analysis evaluated five interventions (aerobic training, resistance training, aerobi-resistance training, whole-body electrical stimulation, and electrical stimulation with protein supplementation) on body composition, physical function and quality of life in elderly sarcopenia patients. Methods: Six databases, including PubMed, Embase and Web of Science, were systematically searched, and 22 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1062 elderly patients with sarcopenia were finally included. The outcome indicators were those related to the evaluation of body composition, physical function and quality of life. Net meta-analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 to assess the relative effectiveness of each intervention and to test the consistency of direct and indirect evidence. Results: ES&P (SMD = -3.33, 95% CI [-4.23, -2.44], p < 0.00001) and AT (SMD = -1.31, 95% CI [-1.83, -0.79], p < 0.00001, I Conclusion: ES & P and AT have good effect on fat reduction, RT has the best effect on increasing muscle, RAT is the most effective in improving strength, and AT is the best in improving quality of life. Different treatments have different effects on functional indicators, and clinics should personalize the selection of different interventions according to the patient's condition and combine multiple interventions to achieve the best recovery results.
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.