Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 280

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

Relationship of body composition, muscle strength, and aerobic capacity to bone mineral density in older men and women

Bevier, Wendy C., Wiswell, Robert A., Pyka, Gisela, Kozak, Kathryn C., Newhall, Katherine M., Marcus, Robert·1989·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

We evaluated the relationship of body composition, maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max), and muscle strength to bone mineral density in 91 healthy men and women, age 61–84 years. Lean body mass was estimated from two independent measures of fat mass, bioelectrical impedance and skinfold thickness. VO2max was determined by treadmill ergometry with direct measurement of oxygen consumption. Grip and back strength were measured by isometric dynamometry. Mineral density of lumbar spine and midradius were measured by dual- and single-photon absorptiometry. Men had significantly greater lean mass, muscle strength, aerobic capacity, and bone density than women. In women, grip strength correlated with forearm and spine density (r = 0.37, r = 0.28, p < 0.05). In men, grip strength correlated with forearm density (r = 0.47, p < 0.05), and back strength was significantly correlated with both spine (r = 0.46, p < 0.01) and forearm density (r = 0.46, p < 0.01). In women, neither forearm nor spine density correlated significantly with aerobic capacity. In men, midradius density did not correlate significantly with oxygen consumption, but the simple correlation between spine density and VO2max was significant (r = 0.41, p < 0.05). Back strength and VO2max were significantly related in men (r = 0.47, p < 0.01). By stepwise multiple regression, back strength emerged as the most robust predictor of spine mineral, accounting for 19% of the variation in bone density. Addition of VO2max to the regression did not add significant predictive value. However, when VO2max was expressed per kilogram lean body mass, both back strength and VO2max contributed significantly to the prediction of spine density in men, and the coefficient of determination R2 increased to 0.30. We conclude that body mass and grip strength, but not aerobic capacity, significantly predict bone density in elderly women. In elderly men, back strength is a more robust predictor of axial bone density than traditional expressions of aerobic capacity, but VO2max per kilogram lean mass and back strength both make significant contributions to the prediction of spine mineral density. The applicability of these results to younger men and women is uncertain.

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.5650040318

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bevier, W. C., Wiswell, R. A., Pyka, G., Kozak, K. C., Newhall, K. M., & Marcus, R.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
1989-06-01
Volume
4
Issue
3
Pages
421-432
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W2060130757
Cited by
280
References
1
FWCI
13.95
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.