Table 3.

Quality appraisal of included studies

First author's name, year	Selection	Comparability	Outcome	Total score*
Alekna, 2019	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Beaudart, 2015	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Beaudart, 2017	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Beaudart, 2017	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Beaudart, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Chew, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
De Souza Orlandi, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
De Souza Orlandi, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Erdogan, 2019	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Fábrega‐Cuadros, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Fábrega‐Cuadros, 2021	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Gasparik, 2017	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Geerinck, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Geerinck, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Geerinck, 2021	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Guillamon‐Escudero, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Ilhan, 2019	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Imai, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Kitamura, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Konstantynowicz, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Le, 2021	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Lee, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Losa‐reyna, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Mahmoodi, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Manrique‐Espinoza, 2017	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Marques, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Matijević, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Mijnarends, 2016	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Montero‐Errasquín, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Mori, 2019	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Öztürk, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Patel,	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
SilvaNeto, 2016	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Simsek, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Singhal, 2019	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Smith, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Takahashi, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Tsekoura, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Umegaki, 2022 a	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Veronese, 2022	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Woo, 2018	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Yalcin, 2017	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★
Yoo, 2020	★★★	★★	★★	★★★★★★★

^*Total score is on 7 points for cross‐sectional studies (adapted NOS scale for cross‐sectional studies)

^a Umegaki et al. ⁶³ is a longitudinal study. However, for the present paper, only baseline values of the sarcopenic and non‐sarcopenic groups were used in analyses. This study was therefore used as a cross‐sectional one. As a matter of consistence between studies, we decided to apply the same NOS scale than the other cross‐sectional studies.