Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 947

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

A Controlled Trial of the Effect of Calcium Supplementation on Bone Density in Postmenopausal Women

Open access
Dawson-Hughes, Bess, Dallal, Gerald E., Krall, Elizabeth A., Sadowski, Laura, Sahyoun, Nadine, Tannenbaum, Saul·1990·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Background. The effectiveness of calcium in retarding bone loss in older postmenopausal women is unclear. Earlier work suggested that the women who were most likely to benefit from calcium supplementation were those with low calcium intakes. Methods. We undertook a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to determine the effect of calcium on bone loss from the spine, femoral neck, and radius in 301 healthy postmenopausal women, half of whom had a calcium intake lower than 400 mg per day and half an intake of 400 to 650 mg per day. The women received placebo or either calcium carbonate or calcium citrate malate (500 mg of calcium per day) for two years. Results. In women who had undergone menopause five or fewer years earlier, bone loss from the spine was rapid and was not affected by supplementation with calcium. Among the women who had been postmenopausal for six years or more and who were given placebo, bone loss was less rapid in the group with the higher dietary calcium intake. In those with the lower calcium intake, calcium citrate malate prevented bone loss during the two years of the study; its effect was significantly different from that of placebo (P less than 0.05) at the femoral neck (mean change in bone density [+/- SE], 0.87 +/- 1.01 percent vs. -2.11 +/- 0.93 percent), radius (1.05 +/- 0.75 percent vs. -2.33 +/- 0.72 percent), and spine (-0.38 +/- 0.82 percent vs. -2.85 +/- 0.77 percent). Calcium carbonate maintained bone density at the femoral neck (mean change in bone density, 0.08 +/- 0.98 percent) and radius (0.24 +/- 0.70 percent) but not the spine (-2.54 +/- 0.85 percent). Among the women who had been postmenopausal for six years or more and who had the higher calcium intake, those in all three treatment groups maintained bone density at the hip and radius and lost bone from the spine. Conclusions. Healthy older postmenopausal women with a daily calcium intake of less than 400 mg can significantly reduce bone loss by increasing their calcium intake to 800 mg per day. At the dose we tested, supplementation with calcium citrate malate was more effective than supplementation with calcium carbonate.

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 · 10.1056/nejm199009273231305

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 947

Metadata

Authors
Dawson-Hughes, B., Dallal, G. E., Krall, E. A., Sadowski, L., Sahyoun, N., & Tannenbaum, S.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1990-09-27
Volume
323
Issue
13
Pages
878-883
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2616697655
Cited by
947
References
1
FWCI
49.73
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.