Cited by 283Nutrition and Health in AgingPhysical Activity and HealthFrailty in Older Adults

Handgrip strength and health outcomes: Umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies

Open access
Soysal, Pinar, Hurst, Christopher, Demurtas, Jacopo, Firth, Joseph, Howden, Reuben, Yang, Lin, Tully, Mark A., Koyanagi, Ai +5 more·2021·Journal of Sport and Health Science

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of the present study was to assess both the credibility and strength of evidence arising from systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies on handgrip strength and health outcomes. METHODS: An umbrella review of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of observational studies was conducted. We assessed meta-analyses of observational studies based on random-effect summary effect sizes and their p values, 95% prediction intervals, heterogeneity, small-study effects, and excess significance. We graded the evidence from convincing (Class I) to weak (Class IV). RESULTS: ). No outcome presented convincing evidence. Three associations showed Class II evidence (i.e., highly suggestive): (1) higher handgrip values at baseline were associated with a minor reduction in mortality risk in the general population (n = 34 studies; sample size = 1,855,817; relative risk = 0.72, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.67-0.78), (2) cardiovascular death risk in mixed populations (n = 15 studies; relative risk = 0.84, 95%CI: 0.78-0.91), and (3) incidence of disability (n = 7 studies; relative risk = 0.76, 95%CI: 0.66-0.87). CONCLUSION: The present results show that handgrip strength is a useful indicator for general health status and specifically for early all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, as well as disability. To further inform intervention strategies, future research is now required to fully understand mechanisms linking handgrip strength scores to these health outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jshs.2020.06.009

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Handgrip strength is a useful indicator of general health status and, specifically, of early mortality from any cardiovascular cause, as well as disability.

    “HGS is a useful indicator of general health status and, specifically, of early mortality from any cardiovascular cause, as well as disability [110,111].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Soysal, P., Hurst, C., Demurtas, J., Firth, J., Howden, R., Yang, L., Tully, M. A., Koyanagi, A., Ilie, P. C., López-Sánchez, G. F., Schwingshackl, L., Veronese, N., & Smith, L.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • University of North Carolina at Charlotte (US)
  • Alberta Health Services (CA)
  • University of Ulster (GB)
  • Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ES)
  • Queen Elizabeth Hospital King's Lynn NHS Foundation Trust (GB)
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • National Research Council (IT)
  • Anglia Ruskin University (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Veronese, Nicola
  • Smith, Lee
Venue
Journal of Sport and Health Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-05
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
290-295
ISSN
  • 2213-2961 (ISSN-L)
  • 2095-2546
OpenAlex
W3026843787
Cited by
283
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 76 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of sport and health science/Journal of Sport and Health Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ulster University Research Portal (Ulster University) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Anglia Ruskin Research Online (Anglia Ruskin University) (acceptedVersion)
  • IRIS UniPA (University of Palermo) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
Keywords
grip strength, health outcomes, mortality, cardiovascular mortality, disability, evidence quality grading, prediction intervals, small-study effects, heterogeneity
MeSH terms
Walking Speed, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cardiovascular Diseases, Cause of Death, Postural Balance, Health Status, Hospitalization, Humans, Locomotion, Probability, Risk, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Bias, Sample Size, Hand Strength, Renal Insufficiency, Chronic, Observational Studies as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review