canceldeath
Registry update — unassessed

Research on Lower Limb Rehabilitation Robots for Sarcopenia

Trial registry update: RECRUITING. No results reported in the supplied registry record.

RCTMinor significance
Reporter brief

What this changes

The finding has not established an approved change to our evidence assessment.

Source date: Sep 21, 2026 · Discovered: Sep 21, 2026 · Assessed: — · Research update

What it does not prove

  • Whether the intervention actually improved any measured outcomes—no results are reported in the provided material
  • Whether robot-assisted training provided additional benefit over usual care alone—the comparison was planned but results are not stated
  • Whether outcomes persisted beyond the 8-week intervention period or any longer-term effects

Extracted from supplied source material; model confidence is not a measured probability of correctness.

Design
Rct
Sample size
—
Duration
2 months
Population
adults aged 60 years or older with sarcopenia
Primary outcome
muscle mass and body composition
Effect size
—
Significance
Not reported
Journal
Taipei Medical University Hospital
Published
Sep 21, 2026

Recorded source passages

Abstract or registry material supplied for assessment; source version 2. This is not a claim of full-text review.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn whether lower-limb rehabilitation robot training combined with nutrition education can improve muscle mass and physical function in adults aged 60 years or older with sarcopenia.
Researchers will compare participants who receive lower-limb rehabilitation robot training plus nutrition education with participants who receive usual care, including exercise and nutrition education.
Participants will: 1. Complete assessments before the intervention, around week 5, and after week 8. 2. Receive either 8 weeks of lower-limb rehabilitation robot training using the MRG-P110 plus nutrition education, or usual care including exercise and nutrition education.

Source versions

Version 2: Unassessed

Version 1: Superseded

Assessment history

One thread per scientific event, no matter how many outlets covered it.

Sign in to join the discussion.

No comments yet

Be the first to weigh in on this evidence.