ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2026
Association between the sarcopenia index and osteoarthritis: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThe sarcopenia index (SI) is an accessible biomarker of muscle mass, yet its specific association with osteoarthritis (OA) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate this relationship both cross-sectionally and longitudinally in a large, representative cohort.
methodsWe analyzed data from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study, including 8720 participants for cross-sectional analysis (2016) and a longitudinal cohort of 3,745 participants free of OA at baseline followed through 2020. Baseline SI was the exposure, and self-reported prevalent and incident OA were the outcomes. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression was used to assess the association with prevalent OA and Cox proportional hazards models were used for incident OA. The dose-response relationship was analyzed employing restricted cubic splines, and sensitivity analyses were conducted to confirm the stability of the findings.
resultsThe cross-sectional analysis demonstrated an inverse association between SI and prevalent OA. After multivariable adjustment, each 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in SI was associated with a lower likelihood of OA (OR = 0.921; 95% CI 0.866-0.980); a similar association was found for the highest versus lowest SI quartile (OR = 0.753; 95% CI 0.638-0.887). In the prospective analysis, 676 of 3,745 participants developed incident OA over a median 4.0 years. A higher baseline SI was associated with a lower likelihood of developing OA, both when assessed per 1-SD increase (HR = 0.891; 95% CI 0.813-0.977) and for the highest versus lowest quartile (HR = 0.771; 95% CI 0.597-0.995).
conclusionHigher levels of the SI were significantly associated with a reduced risk of OA. Further investigation is warranted to confirm this association and explore the underlying mechanisms.
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.