Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 829

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

POSTMENOPAUSAL OSTEOPOROSIS: ITS CLINICAL FEATURES

ALBRIGHT, FULLER, SMITH, PATRICIA H., RICHARDSON, ANNA M.·1941·Journal of the American Medical Association
DOI 10.1001/jama.1941.02820220007002
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Our object in this paper is to point out the existence of postmenopausal osteoporosis and to describe its clinical features. Some metabolic data showing the effects of therapy with estrogens and other agents are incorporated in other papers.1 It will probably be well to start by explaining and defining the term osteoporosis. Adult bone is normally subject to two continuous processes—formation and resorption. The mass of bone may be deficient either because resorption is too great (hyperparathyroidism with osteitis fibrosa generalisata) or because formation is too little (osteoporosis or osteomalacia). Formation of bone may be too little, furthermore, either because the osteoblasts do not lay down sufficient osseous matrix or because the matrix, once laid down, is not calcified. The former condition is osteoporosis; the latter, osteomalacia or rickets (fig. 1). It is thought that stresses and strains are an important stimulus to osteoblastic activity and that the atrophy

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1941.02820220007002

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
ALBRIGHT, F., SMITH, P. H., & RICHARDSON, A. M.
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Association
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
1941-05-31
Volume
116
Issue
22
Pages
2465
ISSN
0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1001/jama.1941.02820220007002
OpenAlex
W2077163152
Cited by
829
References
0
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.