ArticleClinical interventions in aging2025
Sarcopenia as a Stronger Predictor for All-Cause Mortality Than Osteoporosis in a Medical Center in Central Taiwan.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. 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.
- Sarcopenia as a Stronger Predictor for All-Cause Mortality than Osteoporosis in a Medical Center in Central Taiwan [Response to Letter].Clinical interventions in aging · 2025Article
- Sarcopenia as a Stronger Predictor for All-Cause Mortality Than Osteoporosis in a Medical Center in Central Taiwan [Letter].Clinical interventions in aging · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Sarcopenia (SP) and osteoporosis (OP) both pose higher risks for adverse health outcomes. This study explored the relationship among sarcopenia, osteoporosis and all-cause mortality. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort utilized a tertiary-hospital-based cohort during the years from 2018 to 2024. Patients received dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans. Osteoporosis was diagnosed when T-scores of <-2.5 were determined at the L-spine or femoral neck. Sarcopenia was defined using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 criteria: low muscle strength, low physical performance, and a low appendicular skeletal mass index. We utilized the Cox proportional hazard model and Kaplan-Meier curves to depict observed time to mortality. Post-hoc analysis was applied for subgroup comparison and statistical power calculation. Interaction terms sensitivity analysis was used for analyzing mutually exclusive groups. Results: A total of 545 patients (median age [interquartile range] 68.7 [52.8-80.7] years; 72.3% women) were analyzed. At baseline, 15.6% had SP alone, 23.1% had OP alone, and 14.3% had both conditions. Over median 0.7 (interquartile range = 0.2-1.4) years of follow-up, 24 deaths occurred. Older age, multimorbidity, sarcopenia, and osteoporosis were significantly associated with higher mortality. In multivariable analysis adjusting for age and multimorbidity, sarcopenia alone was a stronger predictor of mortality compared to osteoporosis alone (hazard ratio [HR] 7.34 vs 3.99), and the mortality HR was 7.34 for sarcopenia with or without osteoporosis higher than 3.99 for osteoporosis with/without sarcopenia. Interaction analysis was not feasible in the four-group comparison, as the interaction term overlapped with the 'both sarcopenia and osteoporosis' group; in the other three groups, the SP×OP interaction was not significant. SP patients were more likely to be older, male, and have lower body mass index, total tissue, and lean mass. Conclusion: These findings suggest that sarcopenia may be a more important predictor of mortality than osteoporosis in patients, highlighting the need for muscle health assessment.
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.