The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Risk factors for progression of lumbar spine disc degeneration: The Chingford Study
Abstract
Objective: Few data exist concerning the natural history of lumbar spine disc degeneration and associated risk factors. We therefore undertook this study to examine the radiographic progression of lumbar spine disc degeneration over the course of 9 years in a population‐based inception cohort of women from the Chingford Study. Methods: Seven hundred ninety‐six paired lumbar spine radiographs were read by a single reader for anterior osteophytes (AO) and disc space narrowing (DSN) using the Lane atlas at each lumbar disc space (L1–5). Disc degeneration was defined using thresholds of AO and DSN grade 1+ in one or more vertebrae (L1–5) within a subject. Progression was defined as an increase in grade in an affected year‐1 vertebra. Potential risk factors were assessed using odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), and other potential confounders in logistic regression models using the STATA statistical package. Results: The mean ± SD age at baseline was 53.8 ± 6.0 years, and mean ± SD BMI was 25.4 ± 4.1 kg/m 2. Progression rates for AO and DSN were 4% per annum and 3% per annum, respectively. Progression of DSN was predicted by age, back pain, and radiographic hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA). Progression of AO was predicted by age and radiographic hip OA, with borderline significance for BMI >30 kg/m 2. No significant effects were seen for smoking, physical activity, hormone replacement therapy use, multiparity, or hand OA. Conclusion: This is the first population‐based longitudinal study to assess progression of the individual radiographic features of AO and DSN in lumbar spine disc degeneration. We demonstrated progression rates of 3–4% per annum, with important risk factors for progression, including age, back pain, and radiographic OA at the hip and knee.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
de Schepper, E. I. T., Damen, J., van Meurs, J. B. J., Ginai, A. Z., Popham, M., Hofman, A., Koes, B. W., & Bierma-Zeinstra, S. M. (2010) · Spine · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3181aa5b33 · Cited by 458
Dudli, S., Fields, A. J., Samartzis, D., Karppinen, J., & Lotz, J. C. (2016) · European Spine Journal · doi:10.1007/s00586-016-4459-7 · Cited by 386
Epidemiology of osteoarthritis in Australia
March, L. M., & Bagga, H. (2004) · Medical Journal of Australia · doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb05906.x · Cited by 205
Intervertebral disc degeneration: A focus on obesity and type 2 diabetes
Cannata, F., Vadalà, G., Ambrosio, L., Fallucca, S., Napoli, N., Papalia, R., Pozzilli, P., & Denaro, V. (2020) · Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews · doi:10.1002/dmrr.3224 · Cited by 144
Gut Microbiota Composition Before and After Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors
Hojo, M., Asahara, T., Nagahara, A., Takeda, T., Matsumoto, K., Ueyama, H., Matsumoto, K., Asaoka, D., Takahashi, T., Nomoto, K., et al. (2018) · Digestive Diseases and Sciences · doi:10.1007/s10620-018-5122-4 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Hassett, G., Hart, D. J., Manek, N. J., Doyle, D. V., & Spector, T. D.
- Venue
- Arthritis & Rheumatism
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-11
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 3112-3117
- ISSN
- 0004-3591 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-0131
- OpenAlex
- W1981295657
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.36
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk factors for progression of lumbar spine disc degeneration: The Chingford Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/art.11321
- The paper
- Hassett, G., Hart, D. J., Manek, N. J., Doyle, D. V., & Spector, T. D. (2003). Risk factors for progression of lumbar spine disc degeneration: The Chingford Study. Arthritis & Rheumatism. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.11321
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.