Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 850

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sarcopenia in daily practice: assessment and management

Open access
Beaudart, Charlotte, McCloskey, Eugène, Bruyère, Olivier, Cesari, Matteo, Rolland, Yves, Rizzoli, René, Araujo de Carvalho, Islène, Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan, Jotheeswaran, Bautmans, Ivan, Bertière, Marie-Claude, Brandi, Maria Luisa, Al-Daghri, Nasser M., Burlet, Nansa, Cavalier, Etienne, Cerreta, Francesca, Cherubini, Antonio, Fielding, Roger, Gielen, Evelien, Landi, Francesco, Petermans, Jean, Reginster, Jean-Yves, Visser, Marjolein, Kanis, John, Cooper, Cyrus·2016·BMC Geriatrics
DOI 10.1186/s12877-016-0349-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia is increasingly recognized as a correlate of ageing and is associated with increased likelihood of adverse outcomes including falls, fractures, frailty and mortality. Several tools have been recommended to assess muscle mass, muscle strength and physical performance in clinical trials. Whilst these tools have proven to be accurate and reliable in investigational settings, many are not easily applied to daily practice. METHODS: This paper is based on literature reviews performed by members of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis (ESCEO) working group on frailty and sarcopenia. Face-to-face meetings were afterwards organized for the whole group to make amendments and discuss further recommendations. RESULTS: This paper proposes some user-friendly and inexpensive methods that can be used to assess sarcopenia in real-life settings. Healthcare providers, particularly in primary care, should consider an assessment of sarcopenia in individuals at increased risk; suggested tools for assessing risk include the Red Flag Method, the SARC-F questionnaire, the SMI method or different prediction equations. Management of sarcopenia should primarily be patient centered and involve the combination of both resistance and endurance based activity programmes with or without dietary interventions. Development of a number of pharmacological interventions is also in progress. CONCLUSIONS: Assessment of sarcopenia in individuals with risk factors, symptoms and/or conditions exposing them to the risk of disability will become particularly important in the near future.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/s12877-016-0349-4

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Beaudart, C., McCloskey, E., Bruyère, O., Cesari, M., Rolland, Y., Rizzoli, R., Araujo de Carvalho, I., Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan, J., Bautmans, I., Bertière, M.-C., Brandi, M. L., Al-Daghri, N. M., Burlet, N., Cavalier, E., Cerreta, F., Cherubini, A., Fielding, R., Gielen, E., Landi, F., Petermans, J., Reginster, J.-Y., Visser, M., Kanis, J., & Cooper, C.
Venue
BMC Geriatrics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2016-10-05
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
170-170
ISSN
1471-2318 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12877-016-0349-4
OpenAlex
W2529732846
Cited by
850
References
22
FWCI
26.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.