Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 563

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Factors Associated with Appendicular Bone Mass in Older Women

Bauer, Douglas C., Browner, Warren S., Cauley, Jane A., Orwoll, Eric S., Scott, Jean C., Black, Dennis M., Tao, Jo L., Cummings, Steven R., and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group*·1993·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the factors associated with appendicular bone mass in older women. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of baseline data collected for a multicenter, prospective study of osteoporotic fractures. SETTING: Four clinical centers in Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Portland, Oregon; and the Monongahela valley, Pennsylvania. PATIENTS: A total of 9704 ambulatory, nonblack women, ages 65 years or older, recruited from population-based listings. MEASUREMENTS: Demographic and historical information and anthropometric measurements were obtained from a baseline questionnaire, interview, and examination. Single-photon absorptiometry scans were obtained at three sites: the distal radius, midradius, and calcaneus. Multivariate associations with bone mass were first examined in a randomly selected half of the cohort (training group) and were then tested on the other half of the cohort (validation group). RESULTS: In order of decreasing strength of association, estrogen use, non-insulin-dependent diabetes, thiazide use, increased weight, greater muscle strength, later age at menopause, and greater height were independently associated with higher bone mass. Gastric surgery, age, history of maternal fracture, smoking, and caffeine intake were associated with lower bone mass (all P < 0.05). For example, we found that 2 or more years of estrogen use was associated with a 7.2% increase in distal radius bone mass, whereas gastrectomy was associated with an 8.2% decrease in bone mass. The associations between bone mass and dietary calcium intake and rheumatoid arthritis were inconsistent. Alcohol use, physical activity, use of calcium supplements, pregnancy, breast-feeding, parental nationality, and hair color were among the many variables not associated with bone mass. Multivariate models accounted for 20% to 35% of the total variance of bone mass. CONCLUSIONS: A large number of factors influence the bone mass of elderly women; however, age, weight, muscle strength, and estrogen use are the most important factors.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-118-9-199305010-00001

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.

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

Cited by

See all 563

Metadata

Authors
Bauer, D. C., Browner, W. S., Cauley, J. A., Orwoll, E. S., Scott, J. C., Black, D. M., Tao, J. L., Cummings, S. R., & and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group*
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
1993-05-01
Volume
118
Issue
9
Pages
657-665
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W2072414506
Cited by
563
References
0
FWCI
25.17
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: Factors Associated with Appendicular Bone Mass in Older Women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.7326/0003-4819-118-9-199305010-00001
The paper
Bauer, D. C., Browner, W. S., Cauley, J. A., Orwoll, E. S., Scott, J. C., Black, D. M., Tao, J. L., Cummings, S. R., & and Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group*. (1993). Factors Associated with Appendicular Bone Mass in Older Women. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-118-9-199305010-00001

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.