Cited by 479Nutrition and Health in AgingFrailty in Older AdultsBody Composition Measurement Techniques

The prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults, an exploration of differences between studies and within definitions: a systematic review and meta-analyses

Open access
Mayhew, A J, Amog, K, Phillips, S, Parise, G, McNicholas, P D, de Souza, R J, Thabane, L, Raina, P·2019·Age and Ageing

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.

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 · 10.1093/ageing/afy106

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • This is the first study that reports the prevalence of severe sarcopenia.

    “this is the first study that reports the prevalence of severe sarcopenia.”
  • Some previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses estimated the prevalence of sarcopenia, but only in healthy older adults, community-dwelling older people, or using two diagnostic criteria.

    “Some previous systematic reviews and meta‐analyses estimated the prevalence of sarcopenia; nevertheless, this prevalence was estimated in healthy older adults only, 14 or community‐dwelling older people, 15 , 16 or only using two diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia. 17”
  • Mayhew et al. reported the prevalence of sarcopenia only in community-dwelling older adults; reviewing 109 studies, they identified that the prevalence ranged from 9.9% to 40.4% depending on the diagnostic criterion used.

    “Mayhew et al. reported the prevalence of sarcopenia only in community‐dwelling older adults. 16 Reviewing 109 studies, they identified that the prevalence of sarcopenia in this population ranged from 9.9% to 40.4% depending on the diagnostic criterion used.”
  • Few systematic reviews and meta-analyses have attempted to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia across the globe.

    “Few systematic reviews and meta‐analyses have been attempted to investigate the prevalence of sarcopenia across the globe. 14 , 15 , 16”
  • Because of variations in population characteristics and criteria, there is no universally recognized standard for CT-based sarcopenia diagnosis.

    “However, because of variations in population characteristics and criteria, there is no universally recognized standard for CT-based sarcopenia diagnosis.58”

    From Imaging of Sarcopenia in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (2024) · cites this paper as [58]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Rosenberg IH. Symposium: Sarcopenia: Diagnosis and Mechanisms Sarcopenia: Origins and Clinical Relevance 1. 1997;990-991.
  2. World Health Organization. The International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, 2nd edition. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2016.
  3. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for report- ing. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-12.
  4. Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K et al. The systematic review of preva- lence and incidence data. The Joanna Briggs Institute. 2014, 37 p.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mayhew, A. J., Amog, K., Phillips, S., Parise, G., McNicholas, P. D., de Souza, R. J., Thabane, L., & Raina, P.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
  • St. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton (CA)
Corresponding author
Mayhew, A J
Venue
Age and Ageing
Published
2018-07-03
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
48-56
ISSN
  • 0002-0729 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-2834
OpenAlex
W2884687693
Cited by
478
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 53 · 2025: 69 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 74 · 2022: 72 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Age and Ageing (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Frailty in Older Adults
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
Keywords
sarcopenia, prevalence, community-dwelling older adults, sarcopenia definitions, appendicular lean mass, walking speed, sex differences, ethnic differences
MeSH terms
Age Factors, Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Prevalence, Muscle Strength, Sarcopenia, Independent Living

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