Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41273547›Full record

ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2026

Machine Learning Applications and Sarcopenia.

N Michalopoulos, E Billis, E Dermatas, E Tsepis, M Tsekoura

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

N MichalopoulosDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Rehabilitation Science, University of Patras, Rio, Greece.
E BillisDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Rehabilitation Science, University of Patras, Rio, Greece.
E DermatasDepartment of Electrical Engineering and Computer Technology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
E TsepisDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Rehabilitation Science, University of Patras, Rio, Greece.
M TsekouraDepartment of Physiotherapy, School of Health Rehabilitation Science, University of Patras, Rio, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this review was to investigate the variety of machine learning (ML) methods and their ability to detect individuals at risk of or suffering from sarcopenia. Sarcopenia is a progressive disease characterized by a significant decline in muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance, primarily affecting older adults. PubMed databases were searched from July to August 2024 for trials related to the sarcopenia prognosis and artificial intelligence. The keywords used were "sarcopenia," "artificial intelligence," "machine learning," and "risk factors." Eleven studies were included involving 15,799 participants. All studies were able to identify sarcopenia with moderate to high accuracy values and with different ML methods. The machine learning methods that standout were deep neural networks, LightGBM, Decision Tree, CatBoost (CAT), and k-nearest neighbors. As for the risk factors, it is found that the most important were age, body mass index, waist circumference, chronic diseases, and some socioeconomic features. In conclusion, machine learning methods have the ability to extract valuable insights from data enabling accurate predictions for the early detection of sarcopenia. These results indicate that ML methods can be used by health professionals for faster and time-saving methods to identify sarcopenia.

Indexed as

Machine LearningSarcopeniaAgedHumansMuscle StrengthRisk FactorsArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRisk factorsSarcopenia

Identifiers

PMID41273547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.