The prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults, an exploration of differences between studies and within definitions: a systematic review and meta-analyses
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: sarcopenia in ageing is a progressive decrease in muscle mass, strength and/or physical function. This review aims to summarise the definitions of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults and explore similarities and differences in prevalence estimates by definition. Methods: a systematic review was conducted to identify articles which estimated sarcopenia prevalence in older populations using search terms for sarcopenia and muscle mass. Overall prevalence for each sarcopenia definition was estimated stratified by sex and ethnicity. Secondary analyses explored differences between studies and within definitions, including participant age, muscle mass measurement techniques and thresholds for muscle mass and gait speed. Results: in 109 included articles, eight definitions of sarcopenia were identified. The lowest pooled prevalence estimates came from the European Working Group on Sarcopenia/Asian Working Group on Sarcopenia (12.9%, 95% confidence interval: 9.9-15.9%), International Working Group on Sarcopenia (9.9%, 3.2-16.6%) and Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (18.6%, 11.8-25.5%) definitions. The highest prevalence estimates were for the appendicular lean mass (ALM)/weight (40.4%, 19.5-61.2%), ALM/height (30.4%, 20.4-40.3%), ALM regressed on height and weight (30.4%, 20.4-40.3%) and ALM / body mass index (24.2%, 18.3-30.1%) definitions. Within definitions, the age of study participants and the muscle mass cut points used were substantive sources of between-study differences. Conclusion: estimates of sarcopenia prevalence vary from 9.9 to 40.4%, depending on the definition used. Significant differences in prevalence exist within definitions across populations. This lack of agreement between definitions needs to be better understood before sarcopenia can be appropriately used in a clinical context.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it