ArticleJMIR formative research2026
Validity of Smartphone-Based Measurement for Assessing Lower Limb Power for Sarcopenia and Frailty Discrimination: Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Increasing life expectancy has increased focus on the health-related consequences of aging, such as sarcopenia and frailty. Given the prevalence of these conditions among older individuals and the frequent resulting long-term care needs, early detection and intervention are crucial. Objective: This study aimed to validate a novel smartphone-based system measuring acceleration during the sit-to-stand movement to detect sarcopenia and frailty. Methods: Participants were 587 individuals from the Otassha study cohort who underwent health assessments in 2023, of whom 569 (96.9%) completed 2 supervised sit-to-stand trials while holding a smartphone on the lower abdomen. Sarcopenia and frailty were diagnosed using the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia 2019 criteria and the revised Japanese Cardiovascular Health Study criteria, respectively. Peak force, rising time (T1), and stabilization time (T2) were extracted from acceleration signals, and reproducibility was examined using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC(2,1)). Predictive models were developed using elastic net penalized logistic regression, and model performance was evaluated using 500 bootstrap resamples. Benchmark models using age and sex, walking speed, and grip strength were also constructed for comparison. Results: Sarcopenia and frailty were identified in 16.7% (95/569) and 9% (51/569) of the participants, respectively. Peak force demonstrated excellent reliability (ICC=0.863), whereas T1 and T2 showed lower reproducibility (ICC<0.30). For sarcopenia, the smartphone model achieved a bootstrap area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.800 and an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.781 (95% CI 0.733-0.826), outperforming walking speed (0.663) and age and sex (0.656) and ranking second only to grip strength (0.845). For frailty, the smartphone model showed moderate discrimination, with an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.659 (95% CI 0.587-0.736), exceeding age and sex (0.604), whereas walking speed remained the strongest predictor (0.751). Conclusions: Smartphone-derived sit-to-stand acceleration provides a practical and scalable approach for screening for sarcopenia and frailty in community-dwelling older adults. While traditional indicators such as grip strength and walking speed remain the most accurate predictors, smartphone-based measurements offer meaningful complementary information and may support large-scale functional screening and early detection initiatives in superaged societies.
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.