ArticleBMC public health2026
Association between diabetes and sarcopenia in US adults and the role of adiposity: a survey-weighted analysis of NHANES 2011-2018.
Article in BMC public health, 2026. 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.
- Article
- Development, validation, and visualization of a machine learning-based predictive model for sarcopenia risk in patients with diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSarcopenia and diabetes are major public health burdens. Body mass index (BMI) represents a complex factor in diabetes-sarcopenia relationship, implicated in both low muscle mass and the high-risk phenotype of sarcopenic obesity, but its role as a statistical mediator in this association remains unclear in population-based studies.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 7,037 U.S. adults aged 20–59 years from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2011–2018. Sarcopenia was primarily defined by low appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ASM/height2; sex-specific cut-offs), with BMI-adjusted low muscle mass (ASM/BMI) as a secondary definition. Survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression and non-parametric bootstrap formal mediation analyses were performed, adjusting for demographic, socioeconomic, lifestyle and comorbidity covariates.
resultsUsing the ASM/height2 definition, diabetes was inversely associated with sarcopenia in models without BMI (Model 2 OR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.47–0.77), whereas the association reversed after additional adjustment for BMI (Model 3 OR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.42–2.39). Higher BMI was strongly associated with lower odds of sarcopenia (OR = 0.49 per kg/m2, 95% CI 0.46–0.53). Mediation analysis suggested inconsistent (competitive) mediation: diabetes was associated with higher BMI (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.09–1.17), producing a negative indirect effect via BMI that offset the positive direct effect and yielded an inverse total effect. In contrast, using the ASM/BMI definition, higher BMI was positively associated with sarcopenia (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.11–1.15) and explained approximately two-thirds of the diabetes-sarcopenia association (proportion mediated = 66.47%).
conclusionThe association between diabetes and sarcopenia differed by the operational definition of low muscle mass. BMI showed definition-dependent mediation: under ASM/height2, BMI acted as a suppressor (competitive) pathway that offset the positive direct association between diabetes and sarcopenia, whereas under ASM/BMI, BMI was a positive mediator accounting for about two-thirds of the association. These findings underscore the importance of specifying diagnostic criteria and body composition when interpreting relationships between diabetes and sarcopenia. Longitudinal studies with functional measures are needed to support causal inference.
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.