The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reduced Bone Mass in Daughters of Women with Osteoporosis
Abstract
To determine whether premenopausal daughters of women with postmenopausal osteoporosis have lower bone mass than other women of the same age, we measured the bone mineral content of the lumbar spine and femoral neck and midshaft, using dual-photon absorptiometry, in 25 postmenopausal women with osteoporotic compression fractures and in 32 of their premenopausal daughters; we then compared the results with those in normal controls. As compared with normal postmenopausal women, women with osteoporosis had lower bone mineral content in the lumbar spine, femoral neck, and femoral midshaft by 33, 24, and 15 percent, respectively (P less than 0.001 for each comparison by the one-tailed t-test). As compared with normal premenopausal women, the daughters of women with osteoporosis had lower bone mineral content at these sites by 7, 5, and 3 percent, respectively (P = 0.03, 0.07, and 0.15, respectively, by the one-tailed t-test). In terms of a standardized score, we calculated that the mean (+/- SEM) relative deficits in bone mineral content in the daughters of women with osteoporosis were 58 +/- 18 percent (lumbar spine) and 34 +/- 16 percent (femoral neck) of the relative deficits in their mothers. We conclude that daughters of women with osteoporosis have reduced bone mass in the lumbar spine and perhaps in the femoral neck; this reduction in bone mass may put them at increased risk for fractures. We also conclude that postmenopausal osteoporosis may result partly from a relatively low peak bone mass rather than from excessive loss of bone.
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
Prediction of bone density from vitamin D receptor alleles
Morrison, N. A., Qi, J. C., Tokita, A., Kelly, P. J., Crofts, L., Nguyen, T. V., Sambrook, P. N., & Eisman, J. A. (1994) · Nature · doi:10.1038/367284a0 · Cited by 1,919
Weaver, C. M., Gordon, C. M., Janz, K. F., Kalkwarf, H. J., Lappe, J. M., Lewis, R., O’Karma, M., Wallace, T. C., & Zemel, B. S. (2016) · Osteoporosis International · doi:10.1007/s00198-015-3440-3 · Cited by 1,378
Pathogenesis of bone fragility in women and men
Seeman, E. (2002) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(02)08706-8 · Cited by 909
Self-citationEstrogens and androgens in skeletal physiology and pathophysiology
Almeida, M., Laurent, M. R., Dubois, V., Claessens, F., O'Brien, C. A., Bouillon, R., Vanderschueren, D., & Manolagas, S. C. (2017) · Physiological Reviews · doi:10.1152/physrev.00033.2015 · Cited by 860
Dr. Slemenda, C. W., Christian, J. C., Williams, C. J., Norton, J. A., & Johnston, C. C. (1991) · Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · doi:10.1002/jbmr.5650060606 · Cited by 608
Metadata
- Authors
- Seeman, E., Hopper, J. L., Bach, L. A., Cooper, M. E., Parkinson, E., McKay, J., & Jerums, G.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1989-03-02
- Volume
- 320
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 554-558
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2024382695
- Cited by
- 627
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 22.74
- 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: Reduced Bone Mass in Daughters of Women with Osteoporosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm198903023200903
- The paper
- Seeman, E., Hopper, J. L., Bach, L. A., Cooper, M. E., Parkinson, E., McKay, J., & Jerums, G. (1989). Reduced Bone Mass in Daughters of Women with Osteoporosis. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm198903023200903
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.