Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 331

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

Hip Fracture Prediction in Elderly Men and Women: Validation in the Rotterdam Study

De Laet, Chris E. D. H., Van Hout, Ben A., Burger, Huibert, Weel, Angelique E. A. M., Hofman, Albert, Pols, Huibert A. P.·1998·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

The aim of our study was to validate a hip fracture risk function, composed of age and femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD). This estimate of the 1-year cumulative risk was previously developed on the basis of Dutch hip fracture incidence data and BMD in men and women. A cohort of 7046 persons (2778 men) aged 55 years and over was followed for an average of 3.8 years. The 1-year hip fracture risk estimate was calculated for each participant according to the risk function and categorized as low (<0.1%), moderate (0.1 to <1%), or high (≥1%). Observed first hip fracture incidence was then analyzed for each of these risk categories by age and gender. Additionally, we calculated the relative risk per standard deviation (SD) decrease in femoral neck BMD in this population. At baseline, 2360 individuals were categorized as low risk, 2567 as moderate risk, and 378 as high risk. During follow-up, 110 first hip fractures were observed corresponding to an incidence rate of 4.1/1000 person-years (pyrs) (95% confidence interval 3.4–5.0). The observed incidence rate in the low risk group was 0.2/1000 pyrs (0.1–0.9), 2.7/1000 pyrs (1.8–3.9) in the moderate risk group, and 18.4/1000 pyrs (12.4–27.2) in the high risk group. Below the age of 70 years, incidence was low in all categories, and very few individuals were considered at high risk. Above the age of 70 years, the observed incidence was high in the high risk group, while in the low and moderate risk groups, the incidence remained low even over 80 years of age. In women, the age-adjusted relative risk for hip fractures was 2.5 per SD decrease in femoral neck BMD (1.8–3.6), while in men this relative risk was 3.0 per SD (1.7–5.4). In conclusion, we observed a similar relation of hip fracture with femoral neck BMD in men and women and were able to predict accurately hip fracture rates over a period of almost 4 years.

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.1998.13.10.1587

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

See all 331

Metadata

Authors
De Laet, C. E. D. H., Van Hout, B. A., Burger, H., Weel, A. E. A. M., Hofman, A., & Pols, H. A. P.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
1998-10-01
Volume
13
Issue
10
Pages
1587-1593
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W2032339353
Cited by
331
References
1
FWCI
17.32
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: Hip Fracture Prediction in Elderly Men and Women: Validation in the Rotterdam Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1359/jbmr.1998.13.10.1587
The paper
De Laet, C. E. D. H., Van Hout, B. A., Burger, H., Weel, A. E. A. M., Hofman, A., & Pols, H. A. P. (1998). Hip Fracture Prediction in Elderly Men and Women: Validation in the Rotterdam Study. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.1998.13.10.1587

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.