Advertisement
JAMDA
AMDA
Advanced searchSave search
Review Article| Volume 22, ISSUE 9, P1864-1876.e16, September 2021

Download started.

Ok

Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the SARC-F and Its Modified Versions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Stefanie N. Voelker
    Affiliations
    Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @AgeMelbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Search for articles by this author
  • Nikolaos Michalopoulos
    Affiliations
    Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    Search for articles by this author
  • Andrea B. Maier
    Correspondence
    Address correspondence to Andrea B. Maier, MD, PhD, Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @Age, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
    Affiliations
    Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @AgeMelbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Healthy Longevity Program, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

    Centre for Healthy Longevity, @AgeSingapore, National University Health System, Singapore
    Search for articles by this author
  • Esmee M. Reijnierse
    Affiliations
    Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @AgeMelbourne, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

    Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Search for articles by this author
Open AccessPublished:June 15, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2021.05.011
Reliability and Concurrent Validity of the SARC-F and Its Modified Versions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Previous ArticleSarcopenia and SARC-F: “Perfect is the Enemy of Good”
Next ArticleIntranasal Oxytocin Improves Lean Muscle Mass and Lowers LDL Cholesterol in Older Adults with Sarcopenic Obesity: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

      Abstract

      Objectives

      Sarcopenia, being prevalent in up to 40% of older adults, is associated with adverse health outcomes. The international sarcopenia guidelines recommend screening for sarcopenia using the SARC-F. A previous meta-analysis (2017) reported poor validity of the SARC-F among community-dwelling older adults. Since then, modified SARC-F versions were developed and new sarcopenia definitions were published, including the SARC-F for case-finding. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the reliability of the SARC-F and its concurrent validity to identify sarcopenia.

      Design

      Systematic review and meta-analyses.

      Setting and Participants

      Adults (all ages) from any study population.

      Methods

      A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, and CINAHL (January 1, 2013, to April 6, 2020). Articles were included if they reported on the reliability and/or concurrent validity of the (modified) SARC-F. No restrictions were applied for sex, age, study population, or sarcopenia definition. Reliability measures included inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency. Meta-analyses were performed for concurrent validity.

      Results

      The 29 included articles included 21,855 individuals (mean age of 63.3±14.6 years, 61.3% females) among community-dwelling (n = 16), geriatric inpatient (n = 5), geriatric outpatient (n = 2), nursing home (n = 2), and long-term care (n = 1) populations. The SARC-F had good (2/4 articles) to excellent (2/4 articles) inter-rater reliability, moderate (1/6 articles) to good (5/6 articles) test-retest reliability, and low (4/8 articles) to high (4/8 articles) internal consistency. The SARC-F had low to moderate sensitivity (28.9%-55.3%) and moderate to high specificity (68.9%-88.9%) according to the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP; n = 13), revised EWGSOP definition (EWGSOP2; n = 6), Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS; n = 13), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH; n = 8), International Working Group on Sarcopenia (IWGS; n = 9), and Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders (n = 2). The SARC-CalF had low to moderate sensitivity (45.9%-57.2%) and high specificity (87.7%-91.3%) according to the EWGSOP (n = 5), AWGS (n = 4), FNIH (n = 3), and IWGS (n = 3).

      Conclusions and Implications

      Despite the good reliability of the SARC-F, its low to moderate sensitivity and moderate to high specificity make it nonoptimal to use for sarcopenia screening. It is recommended to apply the diagnostic criteria for sarcopenia without screening.

      Keywords

      Sarcopenia is a disease characterized by low skeletal muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance.
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Bahat G.
      • Bauer J.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: Revised European Consensus on Definition and Diagnosis.
      Age Ageing. 2018; 48: 16-31
      ,
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Baeyens J.P.
      • Bauer J.M.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: European Consensus on Definition and Diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People.
      Age Ageing. 2010; 39: 412-423
      Its prevalence has been reported to be 1% to 29% in community-dwelling populations, 14% to 33% in long-term care populations, 2% to 34% in geriatric outpatients, and 40% in acute hospitalized geriatric inpatients.
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • Trappenburg M.C.
      • Leter M.J.
      • et al.
      The impact of different diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of sarcopenia in healthy elderly participants and geriatric outpatients.
      Gerontology. 2015; 61: 491-496
      , 
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Landi F.
      • Schneider S.M.
      • et al.
      Prevalence of and interventions for sarcopenia in ageing adults: A systematic review. Report of the International Sarcopenia Initiative (EWGSOP and IWGS).
      Age Ageing. 2014; 43: 748-759
      , 
      • Shafiee G.
      • Keshtkar A.
      • Soltani A.
      • et al.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in the world: A systematic review and meta-analysis of general population studies.
      J Diabetes Metab Disord. 2017; 16: 21
      Sarcopenia is associated with functional impairment, physical disability,
      • Janssen I.
      • Heymsfield S.
      • Ross R.
      Low relative skeletal muscle mass (sarcopenia) in older persons is associated with functional impairment and physical disability.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002; 50: 889-896
      ,
      • Wang D.X.M.
      • Yao J.
      • Zirek Y.
      • et al.
      Muscle mass, strength, and physical performance predicting activities of daily living: A meta-analysis.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2020; 11: 3-25
      falls, fractures,
      • Yeung S.S.Y.
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • Pham V.K.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia and its association with falls and fractures in older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2019; 10: 485-500
      comorbidity,
      • Pacifico J.
      • Geerlings M.A.J.
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • et al.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia as a comorbid disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
      Exp Gerontol. 2019; 131: 1-19
      hospitalization, and mortality.
      • Beaudart C.
      • Zaaria M.
      • Pasleau F.
      • et al.
      Health outcomes of sarcopenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
      PLoS One. 2017; 12: e0169548
      Knowledge among health care professionals on how to diagnose sarcopenia and the availability of diagnostic equipment are currently limited,
      • Yeung S.S.Y.
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • Trappenburg M.C.
      • et al.
      Current knowledge and practice of Australian and New Zealand health-care professionals in sarcopenia diagnosis and treatment: Time to move forward!.
      Australas J Ageing. 2019; 15: 15
      ,
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • de van der Schueren M.A.E.
      • Trappenburg M.C.
      • et al.
      Lack of knowledge and availability of diagnostic equipment could hinder the diagnosis of sarcopenia and its management.
      PLoS One. 2017; 12: e0185837
      despite the willingness of older adults to counteract sarcopenia.
      • Van Ancum J.M.
      • Meskers C.G.M.
      • Reijnierse E.M.
      • et al.
      Lack of knowledge contrasts the willingness to counteract sarcopenia among community-dwelling adults.
      J Aging Health. 2019; (898264319852840)
      Screening of older adults for sarcopenia might be an appropriate step to identify individuals at risk of sarcopenia.
      • Sayer A.
      • Syddall H.
      • Martin H.
      • et al.
      The developmental origins of sarcopenia.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2008; 12: 427-432
      The SARC-F screening tool was introduced to identify older adults at risk of sarcopenia. It encompasses self-reported questions regarding strength, assistance with walking, rising from a chair, climbing stairs, and falls history.
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Morley J.E.
      SARC-F: A simple questionnaire to rapidly diagnose sarcopenia.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013; 14: 531-532
      The international sarcopenia guidelines recommend screening for sarcopenia using the SARC-F.
      • Dent E.
      • Morley J.E.
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • et al.
      International Clinical Practice Guidelines for Sarcopenia (ICFSR): Screening, diagnosis and management.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1148-1161
      A previous meta-analysis reported poor concurrent validity of the SARC-F, however, only including 7 articles in community-dwelling populations.
      • Ida S.
      • Kaneko R.
      • Murata K.
      SARC-F for screening of sarcopenia among older adults: A meta-analysis of screening test accuracy.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 685-689
      Since then, the literature has significantly expanded, modified SARC-F versions were developed, new sarcopenia definitions were published, and the SARC-F was included for case-finding in the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People revised definition (EWGSOP2).
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Bahat G.
      • Bauer J.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: Revised European Consensus on Definition and Diagnosis.
      Age Ageing. 2018; 48: 16-31
      This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the reliability of the SARC-F and its concurrent validity as a screening tool for identifying adults with sarcopenia.

      Methods

      Data Sources and Searches

      The protocol was registered at PROSPERO international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42020182062). The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
      • Moher D.
      • Liberati A.
      • Tetzlaff J.
      • et al.
      Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement.
      PLoS Med. 2009; 6: e1000097
      A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and CINAHL, and included articles published from January 1, 2013, to April 6, 2020. The SARC-F (0-10 points) was first published in 2013
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Morley J.E.
      SARC-F: A simple questionnaire to rapidly diagnose sarcopenia.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013; 14: 531-532
      ; thus, the search was restricted to articles published from 2013 onwards. The search strategy (Supplementary Table 1) was developed in consultation with a senior tertiary librarian from a biomedical university library.

      Article Selection

      Articles were included if they were published in English, if reliability and/or concurrent validity data of the (modified) SARC-F were reported, and sarcopenia according to any definition (for articles reporting on concurrent validity). Exclusion criteria included the following: duplicates, full-text unavailable, no primary data (eg, protocol paper, consensus/statement paper), and conference abstracts and case reports (<5 cases). Articles using the same cohort were selected for inclusion in the following hierarchical manner: (1) larger sample size; (2) more reliability and concurrent validity measures reported; (3) more sarcopenia definitions reported; or (4) if more SARC-F versions were reported. No restrictions were applied for sex, age, or population. The screening of titles and abstracts and, subsequently, full-text articles, to select eligible articles was independently performed by 2 reviewers (S.N.V. and N.M.). A third reviewer (E.M.R.) resolved any disagreements.

      Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

      The following data were extracted independently by 2 reviewers (S.N.V. and N.M.): population; country of included participants; sample size; age; proportion of females; SARC-F version, score, cutoff points; proportion at risk of sarcopenia; reliability and concurrent validity measures; definition(s) of sarcopenia; sarcopenia prevalence; muscle mass measurements, that is, method, device, measure, cutoff points; muscle strength measurements, that is, method, device, and cutoff points; physical performance measurements, that is, method, instructions to participants, and cutoff points. Where sex-stratified data were provided for the mean age and/or the SARC-F score, the weighted value was calculated to determine the overall mean population values.
      Two reviewers (S.N.V. and N.M.) independently assessed the risk of bias using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)
      • Lo C.K.-L.
      • Mertz D.
      • Loeb M.
      Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: Comparing reviewers' to authors' assessments.
      BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014; 14: 45
      ,
      • Wells G.
      • Shea B.
      • O'Connell D.
      • et al.
      The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses.
      Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada2001
      (Supplementary Material 1). Articles were assessed on (1) selection of the study population, (2) comparability, and (3) ascertainment of the outcome. Although the “selection” and “comparability” categories applied to all articles, the “outcome” category was dependent on whether the article reported on reliability measures, concurrent validity measures, or both. The total scores varied depending on the reliability and/or concurrent validity measures reported. For articles reporting only on reliability (0-7 points), concurrent validity (0-5 points), or both (0-8 points), a relative score of 5 points was adopted across all articles. Because modified versions of the NOS were used, a median score of ≥5 points was considered as a low risk of bias.
      • Jüni P.
      • Witschi A.
      • Bloch R.
      • et al.
      The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis.
      JAMA. 1999; 282: 1054-1060
      Discrepancies over data extraction and risk of bias were resolved by a third reviewer (E.M.R.).

      Data Synthesis

      Reliability

      Reliability measures included inter-rater reliability, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency. The inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability were reported using intraclass correlation coefficient values (≥0.90 excellent, ≥0.75 to <0.90 good, ≥0.50 to <0.75 moderate, and <0.50 poor)
      • Koo T.K.
      • Li M.Y.
      A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research.
      J Chiropr Med. 2016; 15: 155-163
      and Cohen kappa (>0.80 very good, >0.60 to ≤0.80 good, >0.40 to ≤0.60 moderate, >0.20 to ≤0.40 fair, and ≤0.20 poor).
      • Masson L.F.
      • McNeill G.
      • Tomany J.O.
      • et al.
      Statistical approaches for assessing the relative validity of a food-frequency questionnaire: Use of correlation coefficients and the kappa statistic.
      Public Health Nutr. 2003; 6: 313-321
      Internal consistency was reported using Cronbach alpha coefficients (>0.70 high, ≤0.70 low).
      • Nunnally J.
      • Bernstein L.
      Psychometric Theory.
      3rd ed. McGraw-Hill Inc, New York1994
      Reliability measures were analyzed qualitatively and were not pooled because of asymmetrical 95% confidence interval (CI) values for inter-rater reliability and test-retest reliability, and no 95% CI values for internal consistency.

      Concurrent validity

      The concurrent validity of the SARC-F against sarcopenia definitions was reported using sensitivity, specificity, Youden Index, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), negative likelihood ratio (LR–), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy. Sensitivity and specificity were classified as follows: high ≥80%, moderate ≥50% to <80%, and low <50%.
      • Power L.
      • Mullally D.
      • Gibney E.R.
      • et al.
      A review of the validity of malnutrition screening tools used in older adults in community and healthcare settings—A MaNuEL Study.
      Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2018; 24: 1-13
      The Youden Index (J statistic), where J = (sensitivity + specificity) – 1, was classified as high if ≥0.6, and low if <0.6.
      • Fluss R.
      • Faraggi D.
      • Reiser B.
      Estimation of the Youden Index and its associated cutoff point.
      Biom J. 2005; 47: 458-472
      Because a negative J value implies the same diagnostic accuracy as J = 0, all calculated negative J values were reported as J = 0.
      • Schisterman E.F.
      • Perkins N.
      Confidence intervals for the Youden Index and corresponding optimal cut-point.
      Commun Stat Simul Comput. 2007; 36: 549-563
      LR+ was classified as follows: large >10, moderate 5 to 10, and small <5.
      • Jaeschke R.
      • Guyatt G.H.
      • Sackett D.L.
      Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.
      JAMA. 1994; 271: 703-707
      LR– was classified as follows: large <0.1, moderate 0.1 to 0.5, and small >0.5.
      • Jaeschke R.
      • Guyatt G.H.
      • Sackett D.L.
      Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.
      JAMA. 1994; 271: 703-707
      DOR values were classified as no discriminatory ability if 1.0, low discriminatory ability if >1.0 to ≤4.0, moderate discriminatory ability if >4.0 to ≤10.0, and high discriminatory ability if >10.0.
      • Jaeschke R.
      • Guyatt G.H.
      • Sackett D.L.
      Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.
      JAMA. 1994; 271: 703-707
      ,
      • Glas A.S.
      • Lijmer J.G.
      • Prins M.H.
      • et al.
      The diagnostic odds ratio: A single indicator of test performance.
      J Clin Epidemiol. 2003; 56: 1129-1135
      AUC was classified as follows: high >0.80, moderate 0.60 to 0.80, and low <0.60.
      • Power L.
      • Mullally D.
      • Gibney E.R.
      • et al.
      A review of the validity of malnutrition screening tools used in older adults in community and healthcare settings—A MaNuEL Study.
      Clin Nutr ESPEN. 2018; 24: 1-13
      ,
      • van Bokhorst-de van der Schueren M.A.E.
      • Guaitoli P.R.
      • Jansma E.P.
      • de Vet H.C.W.
      A systematic review of malnutrition screening tools for the nursing home setting.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014; 15: 171-184
      Because no cutoff points were available for PPV, NPV, and accuracy, and since these measures are reported on the same scale as sensitivity and specificity, the same cutoff points were applied as for sensitivity and specificity. The SARC-F or its modified versions were considered good when its sensitivity and specificity meet a high AUC or Youden Index value. In the case of sarcopenia, high sensitivity was prioritized over specificity because of the disease’s serious yet preventable nature.
      • Herman C.
      What makes a screening exam "good"?.
      Virtual Mentor. 2006; 8: 34-37
      If concurrent validity measures were not reported, the values were calculated where possible, based on cross-tabulations of reported values of the SARC-F and sarcopenia (except for AUC). Authors were contacted if additional information was needed for inclusion in the meta-analysis.
      A bivariate random effects model was used in the meta-analyses to assess the concurrent validity of the SARC-F.
      • Reitsma J.B.
      • Glas A.S.
      • Rutjes A.W.S.
      • et al.
      Bivariate analysis of sensitivity and specificity produces informative summary measures in diagnostic reviews.
      J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58: 982-990
      When articles reported multiple diagnostic criteria of the same sarcopenia definition, the concurrent validity data for the definition closest to the original definition were included in the meta-analyses. When articles reported on multiple cutoff points of the same SARC-F version, the concurrent validity data for the cutoff point closest to the original cutoff points (SARC-F: ≥4 points, SARC-CalF: ≥11 points) were included in the meta-analyses. When articles reported on probable, confirmed, and severe sarcopenia (EWGSOP2), the concurrent validity data for confirmed sarcopenia was included in the meta-analyses. All concurrent validity measures were pooled, except for likelihood ratios because separate pooling ignores correlations between LR+ and LR–,
      • Zwinderman A.H.
      • Bossuyt P.M.
      We should not pool diagnostic likelihood ratios in systematic reviews.
      Stat Med. 2008; 27: 687-697
      and the Youden Index, DOR, and accuracy because they were calculated (ie, not reported in articles), hence lacking 95% CIs. Meta-analyses were stratified by sarcopenia definition for definitions included in at least 2 articles. Subgroup analyses were performed for SARC-F version, population, sex, and risk of bias. Heterogeneity in point estimates between the studies was assessed using the I2 statistic, with I2 values ≤25%, 25% to 75%, and ≥75% reflecting low, moderate, and high heterogeneity, respectively.
      • Higgins J.P.
      • Thompson S.G.
      Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis.
      Stat Med. 2002; 21: 1539-1558
      The Cochran Q value was used to assess between-group heterogeneity in point estimates, with P values <.05 of the Q value (Qb) considered statistically significant.
      • Higgins J.P.T.
      • Thompson S.G.
      • Deeks J.J.
      • et al.
      Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.
      Br Med J. 2003; 327: 557-560
      Publication bias was visually evaluated by funnel plots showing the standard error against the point estimate and quantified using the Egger regression test,
      • Egger M.
      • Smith G.D.
      • Schneider M.
      • et al.
      Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test.
      Br Med J. 1997; 315: 629-634
      with P values <.05 considered statistically significant (2-tailed). Analyses including fewer than 3 articles were excluded from the publication bias analysis.
      Pooled estimates and forest plots were produced using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (version 2.0; Biostat Inc, Englewood, NJ). Summary forest plots of the meta-analyses were created using GraphPad Prism 8.0.

      Results

      Search Results

      A total of 3915 articles were screened for titles and abstracts, and 82 articles were identified for full-text screening. Twenty-nine articles
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      , 
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      , 
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      , 
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      , 
      • Borges T.C.
      • Gomes T.L.N.
      • Pimentel G.D.
      Sarcopenia as a predictor of nutritional status and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with cancer: A cross-sectional study.
      Nutrition. 2019; 73: 110703
      , 
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      , 
      • Fu X.
      • Tian Z.
      • Thapa S.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF for screening sarcopenia in advanced cancer patients.
      Clin Nutr. 2020; 22: 22
      , 
      • Ha Y.C.
      • Won Won C.
      • Kim M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F as a useful tool for screening sarcopenia in elderly patients with hip fractures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2020; 24: 78-82
      , 
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      , 
      • Ida S.
      • Kojima Y.
      • Hamaoka S.
      • et al.
      Validity of Japanese version of SARC-F questionnaire in patients with chronic liver disease.
      J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 34: 947-953
      , 
      • Kemmler W.
      • Sieber C.
      • Freiberger E.
      • et al.
      The SARC-F questionnaire: Diagnostic overlap with established sarcopenia definitions in older German men with sarcopenia.
      Gerontology. 2017; 63: 411-416
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      Limitations of SARC-F in the diagnosis of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020; 87: 103959
      , 
      • Kim S.
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Validation of the Korean version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia: Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 40-45.e41
      , 
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults using the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2: Findings from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 910-916
      , 
      • Kotlarczyk M.P.
      • Perera S.
      • Nace D.A.
      • et al.
      Identifying sarcopenia in female long-term care residents: A comparison of current guidelines.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66: 316-320
      , 
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      , 
      • Li M.
      • Kong Y.
      • Chen H.
      • et al.
      Accuracy and prognostic ability of the SARC-F questionnaire and Ishii's score in the screening of sarcopenia in geriatric inpatients.
      Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019; 52: e8204
      , 
      • Lima D.P.
      • de Almeida S.B.
      • Bonfadini J.C.
      • et al.
      Clinical correlates of sarcopenia and falls in Parkinson's disease.
      PLoS One. 2020; 15: e0227238
      , 
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      , 
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      , 
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      , 
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      , 
      • Rolland Y.
      • Dupuy C.
      • Abellan Van Kan G.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia screened by the SARC-F questionnaire and physical performances of elderly women: A cross-sectional study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 848-852
      , 
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      , 
      • Urzi F.
      • Simunic B.
      • Buzan E.
      Basis for sarcopenia screening with the SARC-CalF in nursing homes.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 991.e5-991.e10
      , 
      • Woo J.
      • Leung J.
      • Morley J.E.
      Validating the SARC-F: A suitable community screening tool for sarcopenia?.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014; 15: 630-634
      , 
      • Yang M.
      • Hu X.
      • Xie L.
      • et al.
      Screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults: SARC-F vs SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF).
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 277e271-277e278
      , 
      • Yang M.
      • Lu J.
      • Jiang J.
      • et al.
      Comparison of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing home residents.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019; 31: 1481-1489
      were included in this systematic review (Supplementary Figure 1). Eleven authors were contacted, of which 7 responded.

      Study Characteristics

      A total of 21,855 individuals were included (20 to 3,997 individuals per article), with a weighted mean age of 63.3 ± 14.6 years (range: 54.7 ± 11.3 years to 84.6 ± 9.17 years) and of which 61.3% were females (Table 1). Populations included community-dwelling older adults (n = 16; 18,957 individuals),
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      , 
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      , 
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      , 
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      ,
      • Kemmler W.
      • Sieber C.
      • Freiberger E.
      • et al.
      The SARC-F questionnaire: Diagnostic overlap with established sarcopenia definitions in older German men with sarcopenia.
      Gerontology. 2017; 63: 411-416
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      Limitations of SARC-F in the diagnosis of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020; 87: 103959
      , 
      • Kim S.
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Validation of the Korean version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia: Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 40-45.e41
      , 
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults using the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2: Findings from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 910-916
      ,
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      ,
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      ,
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      , 
      • Rolland Y.
      • Dupuy C.
      • Abellan Van Kan G.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia screened by the SARC-F questionnaire and physical performances of elderly women: A cross-sectional study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 848-852
      , 
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      ,
      • Woo J.
      • Leung J.
      • Morley J.E.
      Validating the SARC-F: A suitable community screening tool for sarcopenia?.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014; 15: 630-634
      ,
      • Yang M.
      • Hu X.
      • Xie L.
      • et al.
      Screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults: SARC-F vs SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF).
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 277e271-277e278
      geriatric inpatients (n = 5; 1,598 individuals),
      • Borges T.C.
      • Gomes T.L.N.
      • Pimentel G.D.
      Sarcopenia as a predictor of nutritional status and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with cancer: A cross-sectional study.
      Nutrition. 2019; 73: 110703
      ,
      • Fu X.
      • Tian Z.
      • Thapa S.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF for screening sarcopenia in advanced cancer patients.
      Clin Nutr. 2020; 22: 22
      ,
      • Ha Y.C.
      • Won Won C.
      • Kim M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F as a useful tool for screening sarcopenia in elderly patients with hip fractures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2020; 24: 78-82
      ,
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      ,
      • Li M.
      • Kong Y.
      • Chen H.
      • et al.
      Accuracy and prognostic ability of the SARC-F questionnaire and Ishii's score in the screening of sarcopenia in geriatric inpatients.
      Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019; 52: e8204
      geriatric outpatients (n = 5; 802 individuals),
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      ,
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      ,
      • Ida S.
      • Kojima Y.
      • Hamaoka S.
      • et al.
      Validity of Japanese version of SARC-F questionnaire in patients with chronic liver disease.
      J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 34: 947-953
      ,
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      nursing home residents (n = 2; 357 individuals),
      • Urzi F.
      • Simunic B.
      • Buzan E.
      Basis for sarcopenia screening with the SARC-CalF in nursing homes.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 991.e5-991.e10
      ,
      • Yang M.
      • Lu J.
      • Jiang J.
      • et al.
      Comparison of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing home residents.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019; 31: 1481-1489
      and long-term care residents (n = 1; 141 individuals).
      • Kotlarczyk M.P.
      • Perera S.
      • Nace D.A.
      • et al.
      Identifying sarcopenia in female long-term care residents: A comparison of current guidelines.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66: 316-320
      Fifteen articles included individuals from Asia, 8 articles from Europe, 3 articles from South America, and 3 articles from North America. Three articles reported on reliability, 20 on concurrent validity, and 6 on both reliability and concurrent validity. Twenty articles
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      , 
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      , 
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      ,
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      ,
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      ,
      • Kemmler W.
      • Sieber C.
      • Freiberger E.
      • et al.
      The SARC-F questionnaire: Diagnostic overlap with established sarcopenia definitions in older German men with sarcopenia.
      Gerontology. 2017; 63: 411-416
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      , 
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      Limitations of SARC-F in the diagnosis of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020; 87: 103959
      , 
      • Kim S.
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Validation of the Korean version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia: Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 40-45.e41
      , 
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults using the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2: Findings from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 910-916
      , 
      • Kotlarczyk M.P.
      • Perera S.
      • Nace D.A.
      • et al.
      Identifying sarcopenia in female long-term care residents: A comparison of current guidelines.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66: 316-320
      ,
      • Li M.
      • Kong Y.
      • Chen H.
      • et al.
      Accuracy and prognostic ability of the SARC-F questionnaire and Ishii's score in the screening of sarcopenia in geriatric inpatients.
      Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019; 52: e8204
      ,
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      , 
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      , 
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      ,
      • Rolland Y.
      • Dupuy C.
      • Abellan Van Kan G.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia screened by the SARC-F questionnaire and physical performances of elderly women: A cross-sectional study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 848-852
      , 
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      , 
      • Urzi F.
      • Simunic B.
      • Buzan E.
      Basis for sarcopenia screening with the SARC-CalF in nursing homes.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 991.e5-991.e10
      ,
      • Yang M.
      • Hu X.
      • Xie L.
      • et al.
      Screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults: SARC-F vs SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF).
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 277e271-277e278
      ,
      • Yang M.
      • Lu J.
      • Jiang J.
      • et al.
      Comparison of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing home residents.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019; 31: 1481-1489
      had a low risk of bias (Supplementary Table 2).
      Table 1Characteristics of Included Articles, Grouped by SARC-F Versions
      First Author, YearPopulationCountrySample Size, NAge, y

      Mean ± SD or %      		Female, n (%)
      SARC-F
       Bahat, 2018a
      Same cohort: Bahat (2018)37 concurrent validity, Bahat (2018)38 reliability.
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      		CDTUR20774.6 ± 6.7140 (67.6)
       Bahat, 2018
      Same cohort: Bahat (2018)37 concurrent validity, Bahat (2018)38 reliability.
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      		CDTUR2071.4 ± 8.110 (50.0)
       Barbosa-Silva, 2016
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      		CDBRA17960-69 y: 57.5%

      70-79 y: 31.3%

      ≥80 y: 11.2%      		110 (61.4)
       Beaudart, 2018
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      		CDBEL30674.8 ± 5.9182 (59.6)
       Borges, 2019
      • Borges T.C.
      • Gomes T.L.N.
      • Pimentel G.D.
      Sarcopenia as a predictor of nutritional status and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with cancer: A cross-sectional study.
      Nutrition. 2019; 73: 110703
      		IPBRA7756.1 ± 12.0
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		32 (41.6)
       Drey, 2020
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      		OPGER11779.1 ± 5.294 (80.4)
       Fu, 2020
      • Fu X.
      • Tian Z.
      • Thapa S.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF for screening sarcopenia in advanced cancer patients.
      Clin Nutr. 2020; 22: 22
      		IPwCCHN30954.7 ± 11.3120 (38.8)
       Ha, 2020
      • Ha Y.C.
      • Won Won C.
      • Kim M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F as a useful tool for screening sarcopenia in elderly patients with hip fractures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2020; 24: 78-82
      		IPwHFKOR11580.2 ± 7.42
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		93 (80.9)
       Ida, 2017
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      		OPJPN20771.9 ± 5.44
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		81 (39.2)
       Ida, 2019
      • Ida S.
      • Kojima Y.
      • Hamaoka S.
      • et al.
      Validity of Japanese version of SARC-F questionnaire in patients with chronic liver disease.
      J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 34: 947-953
      		OPJPN14070.8 ± 9.68
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		42 (30.0)
       Kemmler, 2017
      • Kemmler W.
      • Sieber C.
      • Freiberger E.
      • et al.
      The SARC-F questionnaire: Diagnostic overlap with established sarcopenia definitions in older German men with sarcopenia.
      Gerontology. 2017; 63: 411-416
      		CDDEU7482.2 ± 5.60
       Kera, 2019
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      		CDJPN73373 ± 66.7445 (60.7)
       Kera, 2020
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      Limitations of SARC-F in the diagnosis of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020; 87: 103959
      		CDJPN106073.1 ± 6.02
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		772 (72.8)
       Kim, 2018
      • Kim S.
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Validation of the Korean version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia: Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 40-45.e41
      		CDKOR122276.0 ± 4.0645 (52.8)
       Kim, 2019
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults using the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2: Findings from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 910-916
      		CDKOR209975.9 ± 4.01046 (49.8)
       Kotlarczyk, 2018
      • Kotlarczyk M.P.
      • Perera S.
      • Nace D.A.
      • et al.
      Identifying sarcopenia in female long-term care residents: A comparison of current guidelines.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66: 316-320
      		LCRUSA14183.6 ± 7.0141 (100)
       Kurita, 2019
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      		IPwMSDJPN95969.4 ± 9.3699 (72.9)
       Li, 2019
      • Li M.
      • Kong Y.
      • Chen H.
      • et al.
      Accuracy and prognostic ability of the SARC-F questionnaire and Ishii's score in the screening of sarcopenia in geriatric inpatients.
      Braz J Med Biol Res. 2019; 52: e8204
      		IPCHN13870.3 ± 8.82
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		69 (50.0)
       Lima, 2020
      • Lima D.P.
      • de Almeida S.B.
      • Bonfadini J.C.
      • et al.
      Clinical correlates of sarcopenia and falls in Parkinson's disease.
      PLoS One. 2020; 15: e0227238
      		OPwPDBRA21867.2 ± 10.993 (42.7)
       Lim, 2018
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      		CDSGP20067.9 ± 2.2137 (68.5)
       Malmstrom, 2016
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      		CD
      African American Health cohort.
      		USA85359.2 ± 4.34
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		534 (62.6)
      CD
      Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging cohort.
      		USA105384.6 ± 9.17
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		500 (47.5)
      CD
      National Health and Nutrition Examination cohort.
      		USA328872.0 ± 7.86
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		1702 (51.8)
       Mienche, 2019
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      		OPIDN12071.9 ± 6.174 (61.7)
       Parra-Rodriguez, 2016
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      		CDMEX48773.2 ± 8.0390 (80.1)
       Rolland, 2017
      • Rolland Y.
      • Dupuy C.
      • Abellan Van Kan G.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia screened by the SARC-F questionnaire and physical performances of elderly women: A cross-sectional study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 848-852
      		CDFRA2705NR2705 (100)
       Sanchez-Rodriguez, 2019
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      		CDESP9081.4 ± 5.968 (75.6)
       Woo, 2014
      • Woo J.
      • Leung J.
      • Morley J.E.
      Validating the SARC-F: A suitable community screening tool for sarcopenia?.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014; 15: 630-634
      		CDHKG399772.5 ± 5.15
      Calculated based on reported data.
      		1998 (50.0)
       Yang, 2018
      • Yang M.
      • Hu X.
      • Xie L.
      • et al.
      Screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults: SARC-F vs SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF).
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 277e271-277e278
      		CDCHN38471.5 ± 5.8224 (58.3)
       Yang, 2019
      • Yang M.
      • Lu J.
      • Jiang J.
      • et al.
      Comparison of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing home residents.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019; 31: 1481-1489
      		NHCHN27781.6 ± 3.3194 (70.0)
      SARC-CalF
       Bahat, 2018
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      		CDTUR20774.6 ± 6.7140 (67.6)
       Barbosa-Silva, 2016
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      		CDBRA17960-69 y: 57.5%

      70-79 y: 31.3%

      ≥80 y: 11.2%      		110 (61.4)
       Fu, 2020
      • Fu X.
      • Tian Z.
      • Thapa S.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF for screening sarcopenia in advanced cancer patients.
      Clin Nutr. 2020; 22: 22
      		IPwCCHN30954.7 ± 11.3120 (38.8)
       Mienche, 2019
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      		OPIDN12071.9 ± 6.174 (61.7)
       Urzi, 2017
      • Urzi F.
      • Simunic B.
      • Buzan E.
      Basis for sarcopenia screening with the SARC-CalF in nursing homes.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017; 18: 991.e5-991.e10
      Article only reported on the concurrent validity data of the SARC-CalF.
      		NHSVN8084.3 ± 7.956 (70.0)
       Yang, 2018
      • Yang M.
      • Hu X.
      • Xie L.
      • et al.
      Screening sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults: SARC-F vs SARC-F combined with calf circumference (SARC-CalF).
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 277e271-277e278
      		CDCHN38471.5 ± 5.8224 (58.3)
       Yang, 2019
      • Yang M.
      • Lu J.
      • Jiang J.
      • et al.
      Comparison of four sarcopenia screening tools in nursing home residents.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2019; 31: 1481-1489
      		NHCHN27781.6 ± 3.3194 (70.0)
      SARC-F+TC
       Mienche, 2019
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      		OPIDN12071.9 ± 6.174 (61.7)
      SARC-F+CC+TC
       Mienche, 2019
      • Mienche M.
      • Setiati S.
      • Setyohadi B.
      • et al.
      Diagnostic performance of calf circumference, thigh circumference, and SARC-F questionnaire to identify sarcopenia in elderly compared to Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia's Diagnostic Standard.
      Acta Med Indones. 2019; 51: 117-127
      		OPIDN12071.9 ± 6.174 (61.7)
      SARC-F+E
       Kurita, 2019
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      		IPwMSDJPN95969.4 ± 9.3699 (72.9)
      SARC-F+EBM
       Kurita, 2019
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      		IPwMSDJPN95969.4 ± 9.3699 (72.9)
      SARC-F-slowness
       Lim, 2018
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      		CDSGP20067.9 ± 2.2137 (68.5)
      BEL, Belgium; BRA, Brazil; CD, community-dwellers; CHN, China; DEU, Germany; ESP, Spain; FRA, France; HKG, Hong Kong; IDN, Indonesia; IP, inpatients; IPwC, inpatients with cancer; IPwHF, inpatients with hip fracture; IPwMSD, inpatients with musculoskeletal disease; JPN, Japan; KOR, Korea; LCR, long-term care residents; MEX, Mexico; NH, nursing home residents; NR, not reported; OP, outpatients; OPwPD, outpatients with Parkinson’s disease; SD, standard deviation; SGP, Singapore; SVN, Slovenia; TUR, Turkey.
      ∗ Same cohort: Bahat (2018)
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      concurrent validity, Bahat (2018)
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      reliability.
      † African American Health cohort.
      ‡ Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging cohort.
      § National Health and Nutrition Examination cohort.
      ‖ Calculated based on reported data.
      ∗∗ Article only reported on the concurrent validity data of the SARC-CalF.

      Reliability

      Four articles reported on inter-rater reliability, 6 on test-retest reliability and 6 (8 cohorts) on internal consistency (Table 2). The inter-rater reliability of the SARC-F was excellent in 2 articles
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      ,
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      and good in 2 articles.
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      ,
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      Test-retest reliability was good in 5 articles
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      ,
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      ,
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      ,
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      ,
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      and moderate in 1 article.
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      Internal consistency was low in 4 articles
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      ,
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      ,
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      ,
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      and high in 2 articles (including 4 cohorts).
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      ,
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      One article
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      reported low internal consistency of the SARC-F–slowness, a modified SARC-F version.
      Table 2Reliability Measures of SARC-F Versions
      First Author, YearSARC-FInter-rater

      Reliability      		Test-Retest

      Reliability      		Internal Consistency
      CutoffScore, Mean ± SDPrevalence, n (%)ICC

      (95% CI)      		Cohen KappaICC

      (95% CI)      		Cohen KappaCronbach Alpha
      SARC-F (0-10 points)
       Bahat, 2018
      • Bahat G.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • Kilic C.
      • et al.
      Performance of SARC-F in regard to sarcopenia definitions, muscle mass and functional measures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 898-903
      		≥41.71 ± 2.30
      Weighted score calculated based on reported sex-stratified scores.
      		NR0.78

      (0.60, 0.89)      		NR0.78

      (0.61, 0.90)      		NRNR
       Beaudart, 2018
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      		≥41.69 ± 2.00
      Weighted score calculated based on reported sex-stratified scores.
      		52 (17.0)0.90

      (0.76, 0.96)      		NR0.86

      (0.66, 0.94)      		NRNR
       Drey, 2020
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      		≥4NR63 (53.8)0.93

      (0.82, 0.97)      		NR0.90

      (0.78, 0.95)      		NR0.672
       Ida, 2017
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      		≥4NR41 (19.8)NRNRNR0.660NR
       Kera, 2019
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      		≥44.86 ± 1.06
      Weighted score calculated based on reported sex-stratified scores.
      		24 (3.3)NRNRNRNR0.610
       Lim, 2018
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      		≥40.45 ± 0.7410 (0.5)NRNRNRNR0.093
       Malmstrom, 2016
      • Malmstrom T.K.
      • Miller D.K.
      • Simonsick E.M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A symptom score to predict persons with sarcopenia at risk for poor functional outcomes.
      J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle. 2016; 7: 28-36
      		≥4NR157 (18.4)
      African American Health cohort.
      		NRNRNRNR0.810
      ≥4NR66 (6.3)
      Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging cohort.
      		NRNRNRNR0.780
      ≥4NR505 (15.4)
      National Health and Nutrition Examination cohort.
      		NRNRNRNR0.760
       Parra-Rodriguez, 2016
      • Parra-Rodriguez L.
      • Szlejf C.
      • Garcia-Gonzalez A.I.
      • et al.
      Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-language version of the SARC-F to assess sarcopenia in Mexican community-dwelling older adults.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1142-1146
      		≥41.95 ± 1.9095 (19.5)NRNR0.80 (NR)NR0.641
       Sanchez-Rodriguez, 2019
      • Sanchez-Rodriguez D.
      • Marco E.
      • Davalos-Yerovi V.
      • et al.
      Translation and validation of the Spanish version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia in older people.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 518-524
      		≥43.80 ± 2.3051 (56.7)NR0.603NR0.5880.779
      SARC-F-slowness (0-10 points)
       Lim, 2018
      • Lim W.S.
      • Tay L.
      • Yeo A.
      • et al.
      Modulating effect of contextual factors on factor structure and reliability of SARC-F.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 551-553
      		≥40.51 ± 0.834 (0.2)NRNRNRNR0.244
      ICC, intraclass correlation coefficient; NR, not reported; SD, standard deviation.
      ∗ Weighted score calculated based on reported sex-stratified scores.
      † African American Health cohort.
      ‡ Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging cohort.
      § National Health and Nutrition Examination cohort.

      Concurrent Validity

      The prevalence of sarcopenia ranged from 1.8% to 66.2% depending on the applied definition. The prevalence of individuals at risk of sarcopenia ranged from 2.8% to 84.2% depending on the SARC-F version. Concurrent validity measures are reported in Table 3 and Supplementary Table 3. The following sarcopenia definitions were applied: EWGSOP
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Baeyens J.P.
      • Bauer J.M.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: European Consensus on Definition and Diagnosis: Report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People.
      Age Ageing. 2010; 39: 412-423
      (n = 17), EWGSOP2
      • Cruz-Jentoft A.J.
      • Bahat G.
      • Bauer J.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: Revised European Consensus on Definition and Diagnosis.
      Age Ageing. 2018; 48: 16-31
      (n = 8), Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia
      • Chen L.K.
      • Liu L.K.
      • Woo J.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia in Asia: Consensus report of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2014; 15: 95-101
      (AWGS; n = 13), Japanese AWGS
      • Tanimoto Y.
      • Watanabe M.
      • Sun W.
      • et al.
      Association between sarcopenia and higher-level functional capacity in daily living in community-dwelling elderly subjects in Japan.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2012; 55: e9-e13
      (n = 1), Foundation for the National Institutes of Health
      • Studenski S.A.
      • Peters K.W.
      • Alley D.E.
      • et al.
      The FNIH sarcopenia project: Rationale, study description, conference recommendations, and final estimates.
      J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014; 69: 547-558
      (FNIH; n = 8), Chinese FNIH
      • Woo J.
      • Leung J.
      Anthropometric cut points for definition of sarcopenia based on incident mobility and physical limitation in older Chinese people.
      J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2016; 71: 935-940
      (n = 1), International Working Group on Sarcopenia
      • Fielding R.A.
      • Vellas B.
      • Evans W.J.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia: An undiagnosed condition in older adults. Current consensus definition: Prevalence, etiology, and consequences. International Working Group on Sarcopenia.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2011; 12: 249-256
      (IWGS; n = 9), Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders
      • Morley J.E.
      • Abbatecola A.M.
      • Argiles J.M.
      • et al.
      Sarcopenia with limited mobility: An international consensus.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2011; 12: 403-409
      (SCWD; n = 2), Baumgartner
      • Baumgartner R.N.
      • Koehler K.M.
      • Gallagher D.
      • et al.
      Epidemiology of sarcopenia among the elderly in New Mexico.
      Am J Epidemiol. 1998; 147: 755-763
      (n = 1), Delmonico
      • Delmonico M.J.
      • Harris T.B.
      • Lee J.S.
      • et al.
      Alternative definitions of sarcopenia, lower extremity performance, and functional impairment with aging in older men and women.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2007; 55: 769-774
      (n = 1), and Japan Society of Hepatology
      • Nishikawa H.
      • Shiraki M.
      • Hiramatsu A.
      • et al.
      Japan Society of Hepatology guidelines for sarcopenia in liver disease (1st edition): Recommendation from the Working Group for Creation of Sarcopenia Assessment Criteria.
      Hepatol Res. 2016; 46: 951-963
      (n = 1) (Supplementary Table 4). For concurrent validity measures that were not pooled, the SARC-F had low (0.00) to high (0.604) Youden Index, small (0.211) to large (18.9) LR+, small (0.988) to moderate (0.289) LR–, low (0.594) to high (27.1) DOR, and low (11.9%) to high (98.2%) accuracy. The SARC-CalF had low (0.191) to high (0.812) Youden Index, small (1.6) to large (18.6) LR+, small (0.9) to moderate (0.133) LR–, low (1.77) to high (104) DOR, and moderate (66.2%) to high (91.7%) accuracy.
      Table 3Concurrent Validity Measures of SARC-F Versions to Identify Sarcopenia
      First Author, YearSarcopeniaSARC-F
      Definition, YearPrevalence, n (%)CutoffPrevalence, n (%)Sensitivity, % (95% CI)Specificity, % (95% CI)Youden Index (95% CI)PPV, % (95% CI)NPV, % (95% CI)
      SARC-F (0-10 points)
       Bahat, 2018
      • Bahat G.
      • Oren M.M.
      • Yilmaz O.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF to screen sarcopenia in community living older adults.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2018; 22: 1034-1038
      		EWGSOP, 20108 (3.86)≥439 (18.8)25.0 (0.00, 55.0)81.4 (76.0, 86.8)0.064 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		5.13 (–1.79, 12.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		96.4 (93.6, 99.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		19 (9.18)≥439 (18.8)31.6 (10.6, 52.5)82.4 (77.0, 87.9)0.140 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		15.4 (10.7, 52.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		92.3 (88.2, 96.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      IWGS, 20114 (1.93)≥439 (18.8)50.0 (1.00, 99.0)81.8 (76.5, 87.1)0.318 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		5.13 (–1.79, 12.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.8 (97.2, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      SCWD, 20115 (2.42)≥439 (18.8)40.0 (0.00, 82.9)81.7 (76.3, 87.0)0.217 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		5.13 (–1.79, 12.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.2 (96.2, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Barbosa-Silva, 2016
      • Barbosa-Silva T.G.
      • Menezes A.M.
      • Bielemann R.M.
      • et al.
      Enhancing SARC-F: Improving sarcopenia screening in the clinical practice.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016; 17: 1136-1141
      		EWGSOP, 201015 (8.38)≥631 (17.3)33.3 (11.8, 61.6)84.2 (77.6, 89.4)0.175 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		16.1 (5.5, 33.7)93.2 (87.9, 96.7)
       Beaudart, 2018
      • Beaudart C.
      • Locquet M.
      • Bornheim S.
      • et al.
      French translation and validation of the sarcopenia screening tool SARC-F.
      Eur Geriatr Med. 2018; 9: 29-37
      		EWGSOP, 201051 (16.7)≥452 (17.0)36.0 (30.6, 41.4)87.1 (83.3, 90.9)0.231 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		35.3 (29.9, 40.7)87.4 (83.7, 91.1)
      AWGS, 201412 (3.92)≥452 (17.0)75.0 (70.1, 79.9)85.4 (81.4, 89.4)0.604 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		17.3 (13.1, 21.5)94.9 (92.4, 97.4)
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		11 (3.59)≥452 (17.0)40.9 (35.4, 46.4)84.9 (80.9, 88.9)0.258 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		17.3 (13.1, 21.5)98.8 (97.6, 100)
      IWGS, 201137 (12.1)≥452 (17.0)43.2 (37.6, 48.8)86.6 (82.8, 90.4)0.298 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		30.8 (25.6, 36.0)91.7 (88.6, 94.8)
      SCWD, 201118 (5.90)≥452 (17.0)55.6 (50.0, 61.2)85.4 (81.4, 89.4)0.410 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		19.2 (14.8, 23.6)96.8 (94.8, 98.8)
      Baumgartner, 199881 (26.5)≥452 (17.0)22.2 (17.5, 26.9)84.9 (80.9, 88.9)0.071 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		34.6 (29.3, 39.9)75.2 (70.4, 80.0)
      Delmonico, 2007104 (34.0)≥452 (17.0)22.1 (17.5, 26.7)85.6 (81.7, 89.5)0.077 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		44.2 (38.6, 49.8)68.1 (62.9, 73.3)
       Borges, 2019
      • Borges T.C.
      • Gomes T.L.N.
      • Pimentel G.D.
      Sarcopenia as a predictor of nutritional status and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with cancer: A cross-sectional study.
      Nutrition. 2019; 73: 110703
      		EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		47 (41.9)≥432 (41.6)59.4 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		28.9 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.00 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		61.3 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		28.3 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		30 (38.5)≥439 (50.6)30.8 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		71.1 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.019 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		38.7 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		58.7 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Drey, 2020
      • Drey M.
      • Ferrari U.
      • Schraml M.
      • et al.
      German version of SARC-F: Translation, adaption, and validation.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020; 21: 747-751e741
      		EWGSOP, 20108 (6.84)≥463 (53.8)50 (16, 84)54 (44, 64)0.040 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		7 (4, 14)94 (88, 97)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		49 (41.9)≥463 (53.8)75 (62, 86)67 (53, 78)0.420 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		68 (59, 76)74 (64, 82)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		8 (6.8)≥463 (53.8)63 (25, 92)47 (37, 57)0.100 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		8 (5, 13)94 (87, 98)
      EWGSOP, 2010NR≥3NR69 (59, 77)38 (9, 76)0.070 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		8 (3, 18)94 (90, 96)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		49 (41.9)≥3NR86 (74, 94)48 (35, 62)0.340 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		61 (55, 67)78 (64, 88)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		8 (6.8)≥3NR75 (35, 97)32 (24, 42)0.070 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		9 (5, 11)95 (84, 98)
      EWGSOP, 2010NR≥2NR88 (47, 100)23 (15, 32)0.110 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		8 (6, 10)96 (80, 99)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		49 (41.9)≥2NR91 (81, 97)35 (23, 48)0.260 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		57 (52, 62)81 (63, 91)
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		8 (6.8)≥2NR88 (47, 100)23 (15, 32)0.110 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		8 (6, 10)96 (80, 99)
       Fu, 2020
      • Fu X.
      • Tian Z.
      • Thapa S.
      • et al.
      Comparing SARC-F with SARC-CalF for screening sarcopenia in advanced cancer patients.
      Clin Nutr. 2020; 22: 22
      		EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		156 (50.5)≥477 (24.9)22.4 (16.2, 29.8)92.1 (86.7, 95.9)0.145 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		67.6 (55.5, 67.5)61.7 (55.5, 67.5)
      AWGS, 201481 (26.2)≥477 (24.9)32.1 (22.2, 43.4)90.7 (86.3, 94.2)0.228 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		55.0 (40.3, 69.8)79.0 (73.5, 83.7)
       Ha, 2020
      • Ha Y.C.
      • Won Won C.
      • Kim M.
      • et al.
      SARC-F as a useful tool for screening sarcopenia in elderly patients with hip fractures.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2020; 24: 78-82
      		EWGSOP, 201036 (31.3)≥472 (62.6)88.4 (78.8, 98.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		43.0 (31.6, 54.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.314 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		48.1 (37.1, 59.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		86.1 (74.8, 97.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		43 (37.4)≥472 (62.6)95.4 (89.1, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		56.9 (45.5, 68.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.523 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		56.9 (45.5, 68.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		95.3 (89.1, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      AWGS, 201435 (30.4)≥472 (62.6)82.9 (70.3, 95.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		46.3 (35.3, 57.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.291 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		40.3 (28.9, 51.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		86.1 (75.7, 96.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      IWGS, 201160 (52.2)≥472 (62.6)71.7 (60.3, 83.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		47.3 (34.1, 60.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.189 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		59.7 (48.4, 71.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		60.5 (45.9, 75.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Ida, 2017
      • Ida S.
      • Murata K.
      • Nakadachi D.
      • et al.
      Development of a Japanese version of the SARC-F for diabetic patients: An examination of reliability and validity.
      Aging Clin Exp Res. 2017; 29: 935-942
      		EWGSOP, 2010T: 53 (25.6) M: 41 (32.5) F: 12 (14.8)≥441 (19.8) 18 (14.3) 23 (28.4)18.9 (8.33, 29.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      14.6 (3.82, 25.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      33.3 (6.66, 60.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		79.9 (73.5, 86.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      85.8 (78.5, 93.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      72.4 (61.9, 83.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.00 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.004 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.057 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		24.4 (11.2, 37.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      33.3 (11.6, 55.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      17.3 (1.90, 32.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		74.1 (67.4, 80.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      67.5 (58.8, 76.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      86.2 (77.3, 95.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Ida, 2019
      • Ida S.
      • Kojima Y.
      • Hamaoka S.
      • et al.
      Validity of Japanese version of SARC-F questionnaire in patients with chronic liver disease.
      J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019; 34: 947-953
      		JSH, 2016T: 75 (53.6) M: 55 (56.1) F: 20 (47.6)≥422 (15.7) 11 (11.2) 11 (26.2)24.0 (14.3, 33.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      16.3 (6.59, 26.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      45.0 (23.2, 66.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		93.8 (88.0, 99.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      95.3 (89.1, 102)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      90.9 (78.9, 103)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.178 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.116 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.359 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		81.8 (65.7, 97.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      81.8 (59.0, 105)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      81.8 (59.0, 105)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		51.7 (42.7, 60.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      47.1 (36.6, 57.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      64.5 (47.7, 81.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kemmler, 2017
      • Kemmler W.
      • Sieber C.
      • Freiberger E.
      • et al.
      The SARC-F questionnaire: Diagnostic overlap with established sarcopenia definitions in older German men with sarcopenia.
      Gerontology. 2017; 63: 411-416
      		EWGSOP, 2010M: 49 (66.2)≥435 (33.5)38.8 (25.1, 52.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		76.0 (59.3, 92.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.148 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		76.0 (59.3, 92.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		38.8 (25.1, 52.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		M: 32 (43.2)≥435 (33.5)40.6 (23.6, 57.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		71.4 (57.8, 85.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.120 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		52.0 (32.4, 71.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		61.2 (47.6, 74.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      IWGS, 2011M: 37 (50.0)≥435 (33.5)54.1 (38.0, 70.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		86.5 (75.5, 97.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.406 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		80.0 (64.3, 95.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		65.3 (52.0, 78.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kera, 2019
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      SARC-F: A validation study with community-dwelling older Japanese adults.
      Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2019; 19: 1172-1178
      		EWGSOP, 2010T: 75 (10.2) M: 66 (22.9) F: 9 (2.0)≥424 (3.3) 9 (3.1) 15 (3.4)8.0 (1.86, 14.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      7.58 (1.19, 14.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      11.1 (–9.42, 31.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		97.3 (96.0, 98.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      98.2 (96.4, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      96.8 (95.1, 98.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.053 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.058 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.079 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		25.0 (7.68, 42.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      55.6 (23.1, 88.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      6.67 (–5.96, 19.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		90.3 (88.1, 92.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      78.1 (73.3, 83.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      98.1 (96.9, 99.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      AWGS, 2014T: 75 (10.2) M: 19 (6.60) F: 56 (12.6)≥424 (3.3) 9 (3.1) 15 (3.4)5.30 (0.25, 10.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      5.26 (–4.78, 15.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      5.36 (–0.54, 11.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		97.0 (95.6, 98.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      97.0 (95.0, 99.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      96.9 (95.2, 98.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.023 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.023 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.023 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		16.7 (1.76, 31.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      11.1 (–9.42, 31.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      20.0 (–0.24, 40.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		90.0 (87.8, 92.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      93.5 (90.7, 96.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      87.7 (84.6, 90.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      Japanese AWGS, 2012T: 167 (22.8) M: 52 (18.1) F: 115 (25.8)≥424 (3.3) 9 (3.1) 15 (3.4)6.00 (2.39, 9.59)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      3.85 (–1.38, 9.07)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      6.96 (2.31, 11.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		97.5 (96.2, 98.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      97.0 (94.9, 99.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      97.9 (96.3, 99.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.035 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.009 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.049 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		41.7 (21.9, 61.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      22.2 (–4.94, 49.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      53.3 (28.1, 78.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		77.9 (74.8, 80.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      82.1 (77.6, 86.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      75.1 (71.0, 79.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kera, 2020
      • Kera T.
      • Kawai H.
      • Hirano H.
      • et al.
      Limitations of SARC-F in the diagnosis of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults.
      Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2020; 87: 103959
      		AWGS, 2014129 (12.2)≥430 (2.8)3.9 (0.55, 7.21)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		97.3 (96.3, 98.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.012 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		16.7 (3.33, 30.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		88.0 (86.0, 89.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kim, 2018
      • Kim S.
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Validation of the Korean version of the SARC-F questionnaire to assess sarcopenia: Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2018; 19: 40-45.e41
      		EWGSOP, 2010T: 95 (7.77) M: 48 (8.3) F: 47 (7.3)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)25.3 (16.5, 34.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      16.7 (6.12, 27.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      34.0 (20.5, 47.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		91.2 (89.6, 92.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      97.0 (95.5, 98.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      86.1 (83.3, 88.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.165 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.137 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.201 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		19.5 (12.5, 26.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      33.3 (14.5, 52.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      16.2 (8.91, 23.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		93.5 (92.1, 95.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      92.8 (90.6, 94.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      94.3 (92.4, 96.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      AWGS, 2014T: 125 (10.2) M: 66 (11.4) F: 59 (9.1)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)24.0 (16.5, 31.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      16.7 (7.68, 25.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      32.2 (20.3, 44.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		91.5 (89.9, 93.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      97.5 (96.1, 98.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      86.3 (83.6, 89.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.155 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.142 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.185 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		24.4 (16.8, 32.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      45.8 (25.9, 65.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      19.2 (11.4, 26.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		91.4 (89.7, 93.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      90.1 (87.6, 92.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      92.7 (90.5, 94.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		T: 95 (7.77) M: 59 (10.2) F: 36 (5.6)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)17.9 (10.2, 25.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      11.9 (3.61, 20.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      27.8 (13.1, 42.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		90.6 (88.9, 92.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      96.7 (95.2, 98.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      85.4 (82.6, 88.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.085 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.086 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.132 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		13.8 (7.72, 19.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      29.2 (11.0, 47.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      10.1 (4.17, 16.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		92.9 (91.4, 94.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      90.6 (88.2, 93.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      95.2 (93.5, 97.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		T: 23 (1.88) M: 10 (1.7) F: 13 (2.0)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)43.5 (23.2, 63.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      60.0 (29.6, 90.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      30.8 (5.68, 55.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		90.6 (88.9, 92.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      96.8 (95.4, 98.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      85.0 (82.2, 87.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.341 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.568 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.158 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		8.1 (3.30, 13.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      25.0 (7.68, 42.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      4.04 (0.16, 7.92)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.8 (98.2, 99.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      99.3 (98.6, 100)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      98.4 (97.3, 99.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      IWGS, 2011T: 167 (13.7) M: 74 (12.8) F: 94 (14.6)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)26.8 (20.1, 33.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      18.9 (1.00, 27.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      33.0 (23.5, 42.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		92.6 (91.0, 94.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      98.0 (96.7, 99.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      87.7 (84.9, 90.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.194 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.169 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.207 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		36.6 (28.1, 45.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      58.3 (38.6, 78.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      31.3 (22.2, 40.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		88.8 (86.9, 90.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      89.2 (86.6, 91.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      88.5 (85.8, 91.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      CFNIH, 2015T: 78 (6.38) M: 46 (8.0) F: 32 (5.0)≥4123 (10.1) 24 (4.2) 99 (15.3)19.2 (10.5, 28.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      13.0 (3.31, 22.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      28.1 (12.5, 43.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		90.6 (88.9, 92.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      96.6 (95.1, 98.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      85.3 (82.5, 88.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.098 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.096 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      0.134 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		12.2 (6.41, 18.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      25.0 (7.68, 42.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      9.09 (3.43, 14.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		94.3 (92.9, 95.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      92.8 (90.6, 94.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      95.8 (94.1, 97.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kim, 2019
      • Kim M.
      • Won C.W.
      Prevalence of sarcopenia in community-dwelling older adults using the definition of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2: Findings from the Korean Frailty and Aging Cohort Study.
      Age Ageing. 2019; 48: 910-916
      		EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		195 (9.3)≥4152 (7.2)15.4 (10.3, 20.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		93.6 (92.5, 94.7)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.090 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		19.7 (13.4, 26.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		91.5 (90.3, 92.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		38 (1.8)≥4152 (7.2)42.1 (26.4, 57.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		93.4 (92.3, 94.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.355 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		10.5 (5.65, 15.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.9 (98.4, 99.3)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kotlarczyk, 2018
      • Kotlarczyk M.P.
      • Perera S.
      • Nace D.A.
      • et al.
      Identifying sarcopenia in female long-term care residents: A comparison of current guidelines.
      J Am Geriatr Soc. 2018; 66: 316-320
      		EWGSOP, 2010F: 11 (7.80)≥430 (21.3)18.2 (–4.61, 41.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		78.7 (71.4, 85.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.00 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		6.67 (–2.26, 15.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		91.9 (86.8, 97.0)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		F: 6 (4.25)≥430 (21.3)33.3 (–4.39, 71.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		79.3 (72.4, 86.1)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.126 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		6.67 (–2.26, 15.6)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		96.4 (92.9, 99.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      FNIH
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2014      		F: 46 (32.6)≥430 (21.3)26.1 (13.4, 38.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		81.1 (73.2, 88.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		0.072 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		40.0 (22.5, 57.5)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		69.4 (60.8, 77.9)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
       Kurita, 2019
      • Kurita N.
      • Wakita T.
      • Kamitani T.
      • et al.
      SARC-F validation and SARC-F+EBM derivation in musculoskeletal disease: The SPSS-OK Study.
      J Nutr Health Aging. 2019; 23: 732-738
      		EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		19 (1.98)≥667 (6.99)26.3 (9.2, 51.2)93.4 (91.6, 94.9)0.197 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		7.46 (1.17, 13.8)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.4 (97.6, 99.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		19 (1.98)≥5161 (16.8)26.3 (9.2, 51.2)83.4 (80.9, 85.7)0.097 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		3.11 (0.426, 5.79)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.2 (97.3, 99.2)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		19 (1.98)≥4306 (31.9)47.4 (24.4, 71.1)68.4 (65.3, 71.4)0.158 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		2.94 (1.05, 4.83)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.5 (97.5, 99.4)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      EWGSOP2
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      , 2018      		19 (1.98)≥3454 (47.3)57.9 (33.5, 79.7)52.9 (49.6, 56.1)0.108 (NR)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		2.42 (1.01, 3.84)
      Point estimate and 95% CI/†95% CI calculated based on reported data. ‡Probable, §confirmed, and ‖severe sarcopenia according to EWGSOP2. Sarcopenia according to FNIH on ∗∗low lean mass, weakness and slowness; ††low lean mass and weakness; ‡‡low lean mass and slowness; and §§low lean mass and weakness. CC cutoff points: ∗∗∗≤33 cm; †††M: ≤34 cm, F: ≤33 cm; ‡‡‡M: <34 cm, F: <29 cm. TC cutoff points: §§§M: <49 cm, F: <44 cm; ‖‖≤31 cm.
      		98.4 (97.3, 99.5)