ReviewSports medicine and health science2026
The relationship between circulating osteocalcin and muscle mass measurements in humans: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Sports medicine and health science, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Osteocalcin (OC) and the undercarboxylated form (ucOC) are bone-derived peptide hormones produced by osteoblasts that are involved in systemic metabolism and skeletal muscle mass regulation. Human studies have been equivocal regarding the relationship of circulating OC with muscle mass. Our aim was to summarize the published findings on the relationship between OC levels and muscle mass measurements in humans and determine if factors such as age and sex impact the outcome. Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and CINHAL databases were systematically searched to identify empirical human studies reporting the correlation coefficients between OC levels and measures of muscle mass. Muscle mass measurements included total body lean mass (tLM), percent lean mass (%LM), appendicular lean mass (aLM), and lean muscle index (LMI). Studies were included in the meta-analysis, with effect sizes being extracted for total OC (tOC) and ucOC. Subgroup analyses examined age, sex, and health status. Results: Muscle mass quantified by %LM had a significant correlation with tOC and ucOC. LMI had a significant correlation with ucOC, but not tLM, and aLM. There was a weak, significant positive association between tOC and ucOC with all combined muscle mass measurements, and the relationship with tOC was more evident in male adults. Conclusion: Circulating OC, specifically ucOC, had a significant relationship with %LM, but not tLM or aLM. Circulating OC appears to be more closely associated with body composition than with total mass. Further studies are needed to determine how age and sex interact with OC regulation of body composition.
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.