The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bone loss in response to long-term immobilisation
Abstract
The histodynamic response to long-term "non-traumatic" immobilisation was studied in young adult Beagle dogs by means of radiomorphometry and histomorphometry, the right forelimb being encased in plaster and the left forelimb serving as a control. The dogs were killed at two, four, six, eight, twelve, sixteen, twenty, twenty-four, thirty-two and forty weeks and the third metacarpal, radius, ulna and humerus removed for analysis of the contributions of the periosteal, haversian and endosteal envelopes to the bone loss at the mid-diaphysis. The bone mass responded to long-term immobilisation in three stages. First there was a rapid initial loss of bone, reaching its maximum (some 16 per cent of original mass) at six weeks, to which all three bone envelopes, to some extent, contributed. A rapid reversal followed, the bone mass approaching the control values between eight and twelve weeks after immobilisation. A second stage of slower but longer lasting bone loss ended twenty-four to thirty-two weeks after immobilisation; the periosteal envelope was the main contributor (80 to 90 per cent of the total loss). The third stage was characterised by maintenance of the bone mass which had been reduced by some 30 to 50 per cent of original values. This pattern was qualitatively similar in all four bones but the distal bones lost more bone than the proximal bones. The extent of resorption surface and the total histologically "active" periosteal envelope increased parallel to the phases of bone loss. The linear mineralisation rate did not differ significantly between the experimental and control sides.
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
Cites
Quantitative histological data on disuse osteoporosis: Comparison with biological data
Minaire, P., Meunier, P., Edouard, C., Bernard, J., Courpron, P., & Bourret, J. (1974) · Calcified Tissue Research · doi:10.1007/bf02547214 · Cited by 435
Cited by
Bone “mass” and the “mechanostat”: A proposal
Frost, H. M. (1987) · The Anatomical Record · doi:10.1002/ar.1092190104 · Cited by 2,132
BIOMECHANICAL AND MOLECULAR REGULATION OF BONE REMODELING
Robling, A. G., Castillo, A. B., & Turner, C. H. (2006) · Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.8.061505.095721 · Cited by 1,343
Who’s afraid of the big bad Wolff?: “Wolff’s law” and bone functional adaptation
Ruff, C., Holt, B., & Trinkaus, E. (2006) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.20371 · Cited by 994
The aging of Wolff’s “law”: Ontogeny and responses to mechanical loading in cortical bone
Pearson, O. M., & Lieberman, D. E. (2004) · American Journal of Physical Anthropology · doi:10.1002/ajpa.20155 · Cited by 745
Pathophysiology of Osteoporosis
Armas, L. A. G., & Recker, R. R. (2012) · Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.ecl.2012.04.006 · Cited by 466
Metadata
- Authors
- Uhthoff, H., & Jaworski, Z.
- Venue
- The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume
- Published
- 1978-08
- Volume
- 60-B
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 420-429
- ISSN
- 0301-620X (ISSN-L)
- 2044-5377
- OpenAlex
- W2115971863
- Cited by
- 388
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.00
- 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: Bone loss in response to long-term immobilisation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1302/0301-620x.60b3.681422
- The paper
- Uhthoff, H., & Jaworski, Z. (1978). Bone loss in response to long-term immobilisation. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.60b3.681422
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.