ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Diagnostic accuracy of sit-to-stand chair test and timed up and go test with proposed cutoff point for identifying sarcopenia in community-dwelling older women: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. 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.
- Lipedema and Dynapenia: Inflammatory Myosteatosis as a Mechanistic Link Between Tissue Expansion and Muscle Dysfunction.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Enhancing sarcopenia screening in primary care: a machine learning approach using simple physical tests vs. SARC-F in 2,788 community-dwelling older adults.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP2) recommends establishing population-specific cutoff points for muscle mass and function to diagnose sarcopenia globally. However, cutoff points adapted for the Brazilian population in detecting sarcopenia through physical tests remain unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) and sit-to-stand chair (5xSTS) tests in identifying sarcopenia in community-dwelling older women.
methodsBody composition was assessed via Dual X-ray Absorptiometry, muscle strength using a Jamar dynamometer, and physical performance through the TUG and 5xSTS tests. The Sarcopenia diagnosis followed EWGSOP2 guidelines. Group comparisons were made using Mann-Whitney U test or t-test. Logistic regression was used to analyze the association between sarcopenia and performance in physical tests. The discriminatory capacity of the tests was analyzed using an ROC curve, and the cutoff points were obtained using the Youden index. Statistical significance was obtained with a p-value < 0.05.
resultsAmong 138 older women, 42.8% were diagnosed with sarcopenia. Women with sarcopenia were significantly older (77.1 ± 7.6 years; p < 0.001), had lower body weight (54.8 ± 8.3 kg; p < 0.001), and lower body mass index (25.1 ± 4.1 kg/m²; p < 0.001), regarding physical performance, worse on both the TUG (14.1 ± 6.5 s; p < 0.001) and the 5xSTS (16.3 ± 5.6 s; p = 0.02) compared to those without sarcopenia. In logistic regression analysis, higher age (OR = 1.12; 95% CI: 1.06-1.19) and slower TUG performance (OR = 1.25; 95% CI: 1.10-1.43) were associated with sarcopenia. ROC curve analysis demonstrated that only TUG test had acceptable accuracy for detecting sarcopenia (AUC = 0.703; 95% CI: 0.61-0.79; p < 0.001), with a cutoff point of 9.8 s.
conclusionThese results demonstrate that cutoff points for screening or diagnosing sarcopenia using the TUG differ substantially between populations and provide an alternative that may be useful for assessing sarcopenia in community-dwelling older women.
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.