ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Diagnostic variability in sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity among older adults: a clinical and public health challenge.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 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
Introduction: Sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) are highly prevalent among older adults; however, the lack of standardized diagnostic criteria compromises epidemiological comparability and clinical practice. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate differences in the prevalence and diagnostic agreement of sarcopenia and SO according to different indicators of muscle strength and adiposity. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 870 community-dwelling older adults. The prevalence and diagnostic agreement of sarcopenia and sarcopenic obesity (SO) were compared using different combinations of indicators of muscle strength (handgrip strength and the sit-to-stand test), muscle mass (fat-free mass index), and adiposity (BMI, waist circumference, and body fat percentage). Results: The prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 9.2% (95% CI = [7.40-11.36]) to 18.8% (95% CI = [16.30-21.65]) and was significantly higher when the sit-to-stand test was used as the indicator of muscle strength ( Conclusion: The findings demonstrate substantial variability in the prevalence of sarcopenia and SO according to the diagnostic criteria adopted, reinforcing the need to standardize more sensitive and consistent methods for population screening and clinical decision-making among older adults.
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.