ArticleClinical interventions in aging2025
Evaluation of the Diagnosis Accuracy of the AWGS 2019 Criteria for "Possible Sarcopenia" in Thai Community-Dwelling Older Adults.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The term "possible sarcopenia" was introduced in the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) 2019 guidelines to characterize individuals at high risk for sarcopenia in primary care settings. However, studies that support the diagnostic accuracy of this criteria remain scarce. Accordingly, the primary aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the AWGS 2019 "possible sarcopenia" criteria for detecting sarcopenia in Thai community-dwelling older adults. Our secondary aim was to explore the use of adjunct variables to improve the diagnostic accuracy of the "possible sarcopenia" criteria for detecting sarcopenia. Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of an epidemiological investigation of the prevalence of sarcopenia among Thai older adults that was conducted during 2021-2022. We assessed the performance of the "possible sarcopenia" criteria against sarcopenia diagnoses based on the AWGS 2019 guidelines. In an attempt to improve the diagnostic performance of the AWGS 2019 criteria, we combined the AWGS 2019 criteria with age, sex, height, body weight, or BMI to create modified criteria. The variable that influenced the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was incorporated in the modified AWGS 2019 criteria. Results: A total of 2456 participants (mean age 69.0 ± 6.1 years, 63.6% female) were included. Of these, 445 (18.1%) patients were diagnosed with sarcopenia. The "possible sarcopenia" criteria showed a sensitivity of 94.6%, a specificity of 54.0%, and an AUC of 74% for detecting sarcopenia. Incorporating BMI improved the AUC by 17%. A BMI cutoff value <24 kg/m² was shown to increase specificity to 72.7%, while maintaining sensitivity at 89.9%. Conclusion: The AWGS 2019 criteria for "possible sarcopenia" showed excellent sensitivity in detecting sarcopenia but lacked sufficient specificity. The modified AWGS "possible sarcopenia" criteria, which includes a BMI cutoff of <24 kg/m², increased the specificity for detecting sarcopenia while preserving high sensitivity among Thai community-dwelling older adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.