Table 4.
Subgroup analyses
| No. studies | No. patients | SMD (95% CI) | I 2 | P for heterogeneity | P for interaction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HRQoL scale (n = 44) a | <0.01 | |||||
| Generic | 24 | 26 143 | −0.49 (−0.63; −0.36) | 83% | <0.01 | |
| Specific b | 20 | 4475 | −1.09 (−1.44; −0.74) | 91% | <0.01 | |
| Age of participants (n = 42) c | 0.48 | |||||
| <75 years | 27 | 25 463 | −0.78 (−1.02; −0.53) | 93% | <0.01 | |
| >75 years | 15 | 4268 | −0.76 (−1.11; −0.40) | 92% | <0.01 | |
| Sarcopenia diagnosis (n = 45) d | 0.16 | |||||
| EWGSOP2 | 15 | 23 826 | −0.86 (−1.16; −0.57) | 95% | <0.01 | |
| EWGSOP1 | 19 | 5257 | −0.54 (−0.72; −0.36) | 79% | <0.01 | |
| AWGS | 9 | 1239 | −1.11 (−1.79; −0.42) | 94% | <0.01 | |
| FNIH | 2 | 473 | −0.73 (−1.65; 0.19) | 88% | <0.01 | |
| EWGSOP diagnosis vs. others (n = 45) | 0.15 | |||||
| EWGSOP | 34 | 29 083 | −0.68 (−0.85; −0.51) | 92% | <0.01 | |
| Others | 11 | 1712 | −1.03 (−1.61; −0.46) | 93% | <0.01 | |
| Settings (n = 43) | <0.01 | |||||
| Community dwelling | 41 | 29 909 | −0.73 (−0.93; −0.54) | 93% | <0.01 | |
| Care homes | 2 | 413 | −1.29 (−1.51; −1.08) | 0% | 0.66 | |
| Continent (n = 42) e | 0.08 | |||||
| Europe | 20 | 10 269 | −0.70 (−0.91; −0.48) | 85% | <0.01 | |
| America | 5 | 1651 | −0.53 (−0.79; −0.26) | 72% | <0.01 | |
| Asia | 16 | 3040 | −1.02 (−1.46; −0.58) | 94% | <0.01 | |
| Australia | 1 | 727 | −0.41 (−0.66; −0.17) | NA | NA | |
| Europe region (n = 20) | 0.26 | |||||
| Northern Europa | 11 | 2545 | −0.81 (−1.11; −0.52) | 83% | <0.01 | |
| Southern Europa | 9 | 7724 | −0.56 (−0.89; −0.23 | 85% | <0.01 |
For the general Forest Plot, when a study presented results for multiple HRQoL scale, the specific scale was used for analyses. One out of the 43 included studies presented results for both generic and specific scale. Therefore, it was possible to add an additional study in the subgroup of generic scale (n = 44).
Because all the 20 studies assessing HRQoL using a specific HRQoL questionnaire used the same HRQoL questionnaire (i.e., the SarQoL), a post‐hoc sensitivity analysis was performed changing the SMD estimate with a MD estimate. A MD of −15.01 (95% CI −19.00; −11.01), I 2 92%, P < 0.01 between sarcopenic and non‐sarcopenic participants was found.
Age was missing in one study, therefore subgroup on age of participants included only 42 out of the 43 observational studies (n = 42).
For the general Forest Plot, when a study presented results for multiple definition of sarcopenia, the EWGSOP2 definition was used for analyses. Two out of the 43 included studies presented results for different diagnosis criteria. Therefore, it was possible to add a subgroup of FNIH definition (n = 45). Given the data obtained we also developed a subgroup analysis to compare EWGSOP definitions (version 1 or 2 combined) versus others (n = 45).
The study of Smith et al. was removed from the analyses per continent (n = 42) as this study is composed with participants from different countries and different continents. Authors did not provide separate analyses per country.
AWGS, Asian Working Group on Sarcopenia; CI, confidence interval; EWGSOP, European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People; FNIH, Foundation for the National Institutes of Health Biomarkers Consortium Sarcopenia Project; HRQoL, health‐related quality of life; SMD, standardized mean difference.