Digestery
Lifestyle practices › Strength Training and Lifespan › Studies

Pooled review (meta-analysis)

Pooled review of 42 studies: resistance exercise improved quality of life in muscle loss

Shen and colleagues · Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2023

Original title: Exercise for sarcopenia in older people: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

Points to benefit

Resistance exercise, alone or combined, gave the best quality of life (standardized mean difference from 0.68 to 1.11). Resistance plus balance exercise raised gait speed by 0.16 m/s. Mortality was a planned outcome; no result is given.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Pooled review (meta-analysis)
Who or what was studied
42 studies, 3,728 people · older adults with sarcopenia (age-related muscle loss), median age 72.9 years
What was tested
Different kinds of exercise, mainly resistance exercise with or without nutrition or with aerobic and balance training, vs usual care. Median follow-up 12 weeks.
What it measured
Other health or performance measures
How long
12 weeks
Who has a stake
No stake declared
No competing interests declared.
Journal
Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle, 2023
Source
PubMed record 37057640. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Pools the results of 42 studies with 3,728 people.
  • •A pooled review is only as strong as the studies it pools.
  • •Measured other health measures, not death from any cause and healthy aging itself.
  • ✓No competing interests declared.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

This paper is not on the ladder. It is a pooled review (meta-analysis), and reviews and opinion pieces discuss studies that are already counted on the steps below.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: death and healthy aging

    0

    Not done yet. This is the step that would answer the question.

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    9

    7 benefit, 2 no difference

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  4. Population studies

    9

    8 benefit, 1 mixed

  5. Blood levels and genes

    0

    None among the papers we read.

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Does strength training help you live longer?”

Linked to longer life; not proven.

Confidence: low. Based on 26 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer
  • Part of the finding “Trials show better function in frail older adults”.
  • Summed up in “What reviews found”: Pooled 42 trials with 3728 older adults with muscle loss, median follow-up 12 weeks. Resistance exercise, alone or with nutrition, aerobic or balance training, most improved quality of life. Deaths were a planned outcome, but no result is given.

Other reviews on this question

See all 26 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The two reads agreed on every checked field. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.