ArticleBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Analysis of SARC-F and SARCCalF accuracy in assessing sarcopenia risk on older adults with cardiovascular diseases admitted to a referral hospital: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSarcopenia, characterized by the progressive loss of muscle mass and function, is exacerbated in older adults with cardiovascular diseases. In hospitalized older adults, quick and practical questionnaires such as the SARC-F and SARCCalF are important for early risk screening and help guide effective interventions.
objectiveTo identify the prevalence of sarcopenia and sarcopenia risk, and to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the SARC-F and SARCCalF questionnaires in screening for probable and confirmed sarcopenia.
methodsCross-sectional study with older adults admitted to the emergency department of a public hospital for cardiovascular diseases between January and September 2023. Sarcopenia was assessed based on muscle strength (handgrip dynamometry), muscle mass (calf circumference), and physical performance (gait speed). The risk of sarcopenia was estimated using the SARC-F and SARCCalF questionnaires. Statistical analyses included Mann-Whitney U tests and ROC curves.
resultsIn a sample of 160 participants, the prevalence of sarcopenia was 21.3%. The SARCCalF identified 42.5 % of older adults at risk and the SARC-F 32.5 %. The SARCCalF demonstrated greater accuracy in identifying confirmed sarcopenia (AUC=0.85 [95%CI: 0.79, 0.91]) and low muscle strength (AUC=0.71 [95%CI: 0.62, 0.79]) when compared to the SARC-F.
conclusionThe prevalence of sarcopenia was lower than expected in the study population. The SARCCalF was better able to identify older adults at risk of sarcopenia and demonstrated greater diagnostic accuracy than the SARC-F in detecting probable and confirmed sarcopenia, standing out as a more effective screening tool for this population.
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.