Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,051

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

Prevalence of Low Femoral Bone Density in Older U.S. Adults from NHANES III

Looker, Anne C., Orwoll, Eric S., Johnston, C. Conrad, Lindsay, Robert L., Wahner, Heinz W., Dunn, William L., Calvo, Mona S., Harris, Tamara B., Heyse, Stephen P.·1997·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

Most estimates of osteoporosis in older U.S. adults have been based on its occurrence in white women, even though it is known to affect men and minority women. In the present study, we used dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry measurements of femoral bone mineral density (BMD) from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III, 1988–1994) to estimate the overall scope of the disease in the older U.S. population. Specifically, we estimate prevalences of low femoral BMD in women 50 years and older and explore different approaches for defining low BMD in older men in that age range. Low BMD levels were defined in accordance with an approach proposed by an expert panel of the World Health Organization and used BMD data from 382 non-Hispanic white (NHW) men or 409 NHW women ages 20–29 years from the NHANES III dataset. For women, estimates indicate 13–18%, or 4–6 million, have osteoporosis (i.e., BMD >2.5 standard deviations [SD] below the mean of young NHW women) and 37–50%, or 13–17 million, have osteopenia (BMD between 1 and 2.5 SD below the mean of young NHW women). For men, these numbers depend on the gender of the reference group used to define cutoff values. When based on male cutoffs, 3–6% (1–2 million) of men have osteoporosis and 28–47% (8–13 million) have osteopenia; when based on female cutoffs, 1–4% (280,000–1 million) have osteoporosis and 15–33% (4–9 million) have osteopenia. Most of the older U.S. adults with low femur BMD are women, but, regardless of which cutoffs are used, the number of men is substantial.

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 · 10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.11.1761

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 1,051

Metadata

Authors
Looker, A. C., Orwoll, E. S., Johnston, C. C., Lindsay, R. L., Wahner, H. W., Dunn, W. L., Calvo, M. S., Harris, T. B., & Heyse, S. P.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
1997-11-01
Volume
12
Issue
11
Pages
1761-1768
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W4296492010
Cited by
1,051
References
1
FWCI
22.16
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.