| Title |
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Association Between Sarcopenia and Dysphagia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The journal of nutrition, health & aging, October 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12603-018-1055-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
W.-T. Zhao, M. Yang, H.-M. Wu, L. Yang, Xue-mei Zhang, Y. Huang |
| Abstract |
Sarcopenia, an age-related decrease in muscle mass and function, is associated with several potential adverse health outcomes. Its association with another age-related syndrome, dysphagia remains unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to explore the association between sarcopenia and dysphagia. PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL were searched for cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies that investigated the association between sarcopenia and dysphagia. First author, publication year, study type, sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria, participant demographics, definition and measurement for evaluation of sarcopenia and dysphagia, main outcomes were retrieved. The association between sarcopenia and dysphagia were expressed by odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). 9 studies are eligible in the systematic review, and 5 cross-sectional studies comprising 913 participants which showed dichotomous classification of sarcopenia and dysphagia were included in the meta-analysis. The crude odds ratios (ORs) were extracted from 5 studies, and 4 of them also provide adjusted ORs. The crude ORs between sarcopenia and dysphagia is 6.17 (95% CI, 3.81- 10.00), after adjusting for some confounders, such as age, sex, Barthel Index score, nutritional status, sarcopenia is also have an association with dysphagia (adjusted ORs, 4.06; 95% CI, 2.27-7.29). The subgroup analysis showed that there was no significant difference between different sarcopenia diagnostic criteria, assessment tools of skeletal muscle mass and dysphagia. Sarcopenia was positively associated with dysphagia. Prevention and screening of dysphagia is essential among sarcopenic old patients. The causal relationship requires more prospective cohort study for confirmation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 35 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 7 | 20% |
| United States | 2 | 6% |
| Greece | 1 | 3% |
| Lebanon | 1 | 3% |
| Austria | 1 | 3% |
| Spain | 1 | 3% |
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| South Africa | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 18 | 51% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 28 | 80% |
| Scientists | 4 | 11% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 128 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 13% |
| Other | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 53 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 18 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 59 | 46% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 21. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 February 2023.
All research outputs
#1,810,444
of 25,728,855 outputs
Outputs from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#212
of 2,003 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,283
of 355,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#3
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,855 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,003 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 355,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.