Sarcopenia in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Sarcopenia has frequently been identified as a comorbid condition in numerous diseases, ultimately influencing patient outcomes. Nonetheless, within the context of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), it has received relatively insufficient clinical focus. This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to estimate the prevalence of sarcopenia among individuals diagnosed with IPF and to investigate the links between sarcopenia and both pulmonary function and prognosis in this population. Methods Comprehensive literature searches were carried out in Excerpta Medica Database (Embase), PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Cochrane Library databases up to 7 July 2025, utilizing relevant MeSH terms. Quality evaluation was implemented through the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. To account for heterogeneity across studies, a random-effects model was implemented. Statistical heterogeneity was examined utilizing I 2 statistics. The overall prevalence of sarcopenia was calculated by pooling data to generate percentages accompanied by 95% confidence intervals (CI). For continuous variables sharing identical units, weighted mean differences were adopted as effect size metrics. Results In total, 15 studies satisfied the eligibility requirements for inclusion. Findings indicated that sarcopenia was present in 25% of IPF cases. Participants were stratified into subgroups based on factors such as ethnicity, age, and diagnostic standards for sarcopenia to facilitate subgroup meta-analyses. A consistently elevated prevalence of sarcopenia was observed across all subgroup classifications. Furthermore, most parameters used to assess sarcopenia were found to be decreased in IPF individuals, and those with sarcopenia demonstrated impaired pulmonary function, reduced exercise capacity, and an overall worse prognosis. Conclusion Current evidence supports the notion that sarcopenia is highly prevalent in IPF populations and may be closely linked to pulmonary functional impairment. Therefore, early identification and therapeutic intervention of sarcopenia should be emphasized in individuals with IPF. Moreover, standardized sarcopenia diagnostic criteria and protocols are urgently needed to ensure accurate meta-analysis results and research conclusions. A prospective, multicenter prospective study with inclusion of sex-specific and comorbidity-adjusted analyses should be awaited in the future. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251089889 , identifier CRD420251089889.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".