Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bone mineral density loss in relation to the final menstrual period in a multiethnic cohort: Results from the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN)

Open access
Greendale, Gail A, Sowers, MaryFran, Han, Weijuan, Huang, Mei-Hua, Finkelstein, Joel S, Crandall, Carolyn J, Lee, Jennifer S, Karlamangla, Arun S·2012·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

The objective of this study was to describe the time of onset and offset of bone mineral density (BMD) loss relative to the date of the final menstrual period (FMP); the rate and amount of BMD decline during the 5 years before and the 5 years after the FMP; and the independent associations between age at FMP, body mass index (BMI), and race/ethnicity with rates of BMD loss during this time interval. The sample included 242 African American, 384 white, 117 Chinese, and 119 Japanese women, pre- or early perimenopausal at baseline, who had experienced their FMP and for whom an FMP date could be determined. Loess-smoothed curves showed that BMD loss began 1 year before the FMP and decelerated (but did not cease) 2 years after the FMP, at both the lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) sites. Piecewise, linear, mixed-effects regression models demonstrated that during the 10-year observation period, at each bone site, the rates and cumulative amounts of bone loss were greatest from 1 year before through 2 years after the FMP, termed the transmenopause. Postmenopausal loss rates, those occurring between 2 and 5 years after the FMP, were less than those observed during transmenopause. Cumulative, 10-year LS BMD loss was 10.6%; 7.38% was lost during the transmenopause. Cumulative FN loss was 9.1%; 5.8% was lost during the transmenopause. Greater BMI and African American heritage were related to slower loss rates, whereas the opposite was true of Japanese and Chinese ancestry. © 2012 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.534

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Greendale, G. A., Sowers, M., Han, W., Huang, M.-H., Finkelstein, J. S., Crandall, C. J., Lee, J. S., & Karlamangla, A. S.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
2011-10-04
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
111-118
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W1994846643
Cited by
304
References
1
FWCI
8.87
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.