Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39752019›Full record

SynthesisAging clinical and experimental research2025

Prediction models for sarcopenia risk in dialysis patients: a systematic review and critical appraisal.

Zhuoer Hou, Xiaoyan Li, Lili Yang, Ting Liu, Hangpeng Lv, Qiuhua Sun

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zhuoer Hou *The College of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China.
Xiaoyan Li *The College of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China.
Lili YangThe College of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China.
Ting LiuThe College of Basic Medicine, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China.
Hangpeng LvDepartment of stomatology, Haining Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Jiaxing, China.
Qiuhua SunThe College of Nursing, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, China. sunqiuhua@zcmu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have developed or validated predictive models to estimate the risk of sarcopenia in dialysis patients, but the quality of model development and the applicability of the models remain unclear.

objectiveTo systematically review and critically evaluate currently available predictive models for sarcopenia in dialysis patients.

methodsWe systematically searched five databases until March 2024. Observational studies that developed or validated predictive models or scoring systems for sarcopenia in dialysis patients were considered eligible. We included studies of adults (≥ 18 years of age) on dialysis and excluded studies that did not validate the predictive model. Data extraction was performed independently by two authors using a standardized data extraction table based on a checklist of key assessments and data extraction for systematic evaluation of predictive modeling research. The quality of the model was assessed using the Predictive Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool.

resultsOf the 104,454 studies screened, 13 studies described 13 predictive models. The incidence of sarcopenia in dialysis patients ranged from 6.6 to 34.4%. The most commonly used predictors were age and body mass index. In the derivation set, the reported area under the curve or C-statistic is between 0.81 and 0.95. The area under the curve reported by the external validation set is between 0.78 and 0.93. All studies had a high risk of bias, mainly due to poor reporting in the outcome and the analysis domains, and three studies had a high risk of bias in terms of applicability.

conclusionFuture research should focus on validating and improving existing predictive models or developing new models using rigorous methods.

Indexed as

Renal DialysisSarcopeniaHumansRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsCritical appraisalDialysisPrediction modelsSarcopeniaSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39752019
PMCPMC11698787

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.