Literature DB >> 13680102

Superiority of age and weight as variables in predicting osteoporosis in postmenopausal white women.

Manfred Wildner1, Andrea Peters, Vibhavendra S Raghuvanshi, Jörg Hohnloser, Uwe Siebert.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Identification of women at risk for osteoporosis is of great importance for the prevention of osteoporotic fractures. Routine BMD measurement of all women is not feasible for most populations, hence identification of a high-risk subset of women is an important element of effective preventive strategies.
METHODS: We identified 959 postmenopausal non-Hispanic women aged 51 years and above from the NHANES III study to assess the relative contribution of risk predictors for low BMD at the whole proximal femur and the femoral neck regions. Based on recognized risk factors for osteoporosis identified by a systematic literature search, we ran several multiple linear regression models based on the results of preceding bivariate analyses. We show several models based on their explanatory ability assessed by adjusted r(2), ROC, and C-value analyses rather than on the coefficients and P values. We furthermore examined the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of our preferred models for various cutoff T-scores-the choice of which will vary depending on different study goals and population characteristics.
RESULTS: Age and weight were by far the most informative predictors for low bone mineral density out of a list of 20 candidate risk predictors. Our preferred prediction models for the two regions hence contained only two variables: i.e., age and measured weight. The resulting parsimonious model to predict BMD at whole proximal femur had an adjusted r(2) of 0.43, an area under the ROC curve of 0.85, and a C-value of 0.70. Similarly, prediction for BMD at the femoral neck had adjusted r(2), area under the curve, and C-value of 0.39, 0.83, and 0.66, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The model equations, predicted T-score = -1.332-0.0404 x (age) + 0.0386 x (measured weight) and predicted T-score = -1.318-0.0360 x (age) + 0.0314 x (measured weight) for whole proximal femur and femoral neck, respectively, can be used in field conditions for screening purposes. More complex prediction equations add little explanatory power. Based on the study goals and the population characteristics, specific cutoff T-scores have to be decided before using these equations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 13680102     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-003-1487-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  34 in total

Review 1.  Assessment of fracture risk by bone density measurements.

Authors:  M Jergas; C C Glüer
Journal:  Semin Nucl Med       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.446

2.  Screening for osteoporosis using easily obtainable biometrical data: diagnostic accuracy of measured, self-reported and recalled BMI, and related costs of bone mineral density measurements.

Authors:  D J van der Voort; S Brandon; G J Dinant; J W van Wersch
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Bone mineral density in healthy Dutch women: spine and hip measurements using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  R J Erdtsieck; H A Pols; D Algra; P P Kooy; J C Birkenhäger
Journal:  Neth J Med       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 1.422

4.  A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1983-09       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  In elderly women weight is the best predictor of a very low bone mineral density: evidence from the EPIDOS study.

Authors:  P Dargent-Molina; F Poitiers; G Bréart
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  The effect of gynecological risk factors on lumbar and femoral bone mineral density in peri- and postmenopausal women.

Authors:  M Tuppurainen; H Kröger; S Saarikoski; R Honkanen; E Alhava
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 7.  The effectiveness of bone density measurement and associated treatments for prevention of fractures. An international collaborative review.

Authors:  D Hailey; L Sampietro-Colom; D Marshall; R Rico; A Granados; J Asua
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 2.188

8.  Bone mineral density and risk factors for osteoporosis--a population-based study of 1600 perimenopausal women.

Authors:  H Kröger; M Tuppurainen; R Honkanen; E Alhava; S Saarikoski
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 4.333

9.  Determinants of bone mineral density in older men.

Authors:  N W Glynn; E N Meilahn; M Charron; S J Anderson; L H Kuller; J A Cauley
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Parity and bone mineral density in middle-aged women.

Authors:  S Murphy; K T Khaw; H May; J E Compston
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994-05       Impact factor: 4.507

View more
  18 in total

1.  A correlation exists between subchondral bone mineral density of the distal radius and systemic bone mineral density.

Authors:  Seung Hwan Rhee; Goo Hyun Baek
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-12-03       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  The impact of obesity on the presentation of primary hyperparathyroidism.

Authors:  Hien Tran; Jacob S Grange; Beverley Adams-Huet; Fiemu E Nwariaku; Jennifer L Rabaglia; Stacey L Woodruff; Shelby A Holt; Naim M Maalouf
Journal:  J Clin Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2014-03-31       Impact factor: 5.958

3.  Performance of four clinical screening tools to select peri- and early postmenopausal women for dual X-ray absorptiometry.

Authors:  B Rud; J E B Jensen; L Mosekilde; S P Nielsen; J Hilden; B Abrahamsen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-09-30       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  The Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool versus alternative tests for selecting postmenopausal women for bone mineral density assessment: a comparative systematic review of accuracy.

Authors:  B Rud; J Hilden; L Hyldstrup; A Hróbjartsson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Older women track and field athletes have enhanced calcaneal stiffness.

Authors:  J M Welch; C J Rosen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-12-11       Impact factor: 4.507

6.  Inverse relationship between body mass index and coronary artery calcification in patients with clinically significant coronary lesions.

Authors:  Jason C Kovacic; Paul Lee; Usman Baber; Rucha Karajgikar; Solene M Evrard; Pedro Moreno; Roxana Mehran; Valentin Fuster; George Dangas; Samin K Sharma; Annapoorna S Kini
Journal:  Atherosclerosis       Date:  2011-11-23       Impact factor: 5.162

7.  Follicle-stimulating hormone and bioavailable estradiol are less important than weight and race in determining bone density in younger postmenopausal women.

Authors:  M L Gourlay; J S Preisser; C A Hammett-Stabler; J B Renner; J Rubin
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2010-12-02       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Paradoxical effects of partial leptin deficiency on bone in growing female mice.

Authors:  Kenneth A Philbrick; Russell T Turner; Adam J Branscum; Carmen P Wong; Urszula T Iwaniec
Journal:  Anat Rec (Hoboken)       Date:  2015-10-07       Impact factor: 2.064

9.  Bone density and fragility fractures in patients with developmental disabilities.

Authors:  W D Leslie; P S Pahlavan; E B Roe; K Dittberner
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-07-16       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Association between height loss and bone loss, cumulative incidence of vertebral fractures and future quality of life: the Miyama study.

Authors:  N Yoshimura; H Kinoshita; T Takijiri; H Oka; S Muraki; A Mabuchi; H Kawaguchi; K Nakamura; T Nakamura
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-10-26       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.