ArticleHealth science reports2026
Parker Mobility Score as a Screening Tool for Sarcopenia in Older German Adults: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Trial Data.
Article in Health science reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sarcopenia is the pathologic loss of muscle strength and mass. SARC-F screener for sarcopenia has been criticized for its low sensitivity. The Parker Mobility Score (PMS) is widely used to assess mobility in older adults. This study evaluates PMS's ability to detect sarcopenia. Methods: We used data from the Paint II clinical trial, which examined the effects of art therapy in community-dwelling older individuals. Sarcopenia was defined using EWGSOP2 criteria: probable sarcopenia as handgrip strength < 27 kg (men) or < 16 kg (women) and/or chair stand test > 15 s. Sarcopenia was confirmed in patients with probable sarcopenia when their appendicular skeletal muscle mass index was below 7 kg/m² for men or 5.5 kg/m² for women. The PMS's diagnostic performance was assessed using ROC analysis. Results: Data from 255 participants (200 (78%) female, median age 81) were analyzed. 196 (77%) participants had probable sarcopenia and 26 (10%) were sarcopenic. PMS showed moderate discrimination for probable sarcopenia, with an AUC of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.68-0.81). The cutoff (< 8) provided a sensitivity of (77%) and specificity of (64%). For sarcopenia, the AUC was 0.61 (95% CI: 0.52-0.69), indicating low to moderate discrimination. The PMS cutoff of < 8 showed high sensitivity (92%), but low specificity (36%). Similar results were observed for sarcopenic obesity, with an AUC of 0.61. Conclusion: PMS demonstrated moderate accuracy for identifying probable sarcopenia and high sensitivity for detecting sarcopenia. Although this high sensitivity is linked to a lower specificity, the trade-off is acceptable because the follow-up diagnostic tests are non-invasive with low costs. Due to its widespread use and feasibility in clinical practice, PMS may represent a practical tool for case finding. Further research is required to confirm its accuracy in different populations.
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.