Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 286

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of incident spine and hip fractures in women and men using finite element analysis of CT scans

Open access
Kopperdahl, David L, Aspelund, Thor, Hoffmann, Paul F, Sigurdsson, Sigurdur, Siggeirsdottir, Kristin, Harris, Tamara B, Gudnason, Vilmundur, Keaveny, Tony M·2014·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

Finite element analysis of computed tomography (CT) scans provides noninvasive estimates of bone strength at the spine and hip. To further validate such estimates clinically, we performed a 5-year case-control study of 1110 women and men over age 65 years from the AGES-Reykjavik cohort (case = incident spine or hip fracture; control = no incident spine or hip fracture). From the baseline CT scans, we measured femoral and vertebral strength, as well as bone mineral density (BMD) at the hip (areal BMD only) and lumbar spine (trabecular volumetric BMD only). We found that for incident radiographically confirmed spine fractures (n = 167), the age-adjusted odds ratio for vertebral strength was significant for women (2.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8 to 4.3) and men (2.2, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.2) and for men remained significant (p = 0.01) independent of vertebral trabecular volumetric BMD. For incident hip fractures (n = 171), the age-adjusted odds ratio for femoral strength was significant for women (4.2, 95% CI 2.6 to 6.9) and men (3.5, 95% CI 2.3 to 5.3) and remained significant after adjusting for femoral neck areal BMD in women and for total hip areal BMD in both sexes; fracture classification improved for women by combining femoral strength with femoral neck areal BMD (p = 0.002). For both sexes, the probabilities of spine and hip fractures were similarly high at the BMD-based interventional thresholds for osteoporosis and at corresponding preestablished thresholds for “fragile bone strength” (spine: women ≤ 4500 N, men ≤ 6500 N; hip: women ≤ 3000 N, men ≤ 3500 N). Because it is well established that individuals over age 65 years who have osteoporosis at the hip or spine by BMD criteria should be considered at high risk of fracture, these results indicate that individuals who have fragile bone strength at the hip or spine should also be considered at high risk of fracture. © 2014 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

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 · 10.1002/jbmr.2069

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kopperdahl, D. L., Aspelund, T., Hoffmann, P. F., Sigurdsson, S., Siggeirsdottir, K., Harris, T. B., Gudnason, V., & Keaveny, T. M.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
2013-08-16
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
570-580
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W1792995416
Cited by
286
References
4
FWCI
19.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.