Literature DB >> 1790412

The impact of measurement errors on the diagnostic value of bone mass measurements: theoretical considerations.

C Hassager1, S B Jensen, A Gotfredsen, C Christiansen.   

Abstract

It has become clear over the last decade that correlations between measurements of forearm bone mineral content (BMCarm) by single-photon absorptiometry (SPA) and measurements of spinal bone mineral density (BMDspine) by dual-photon absorptiometry (DPA) in healthy subjects and patients with spinal fractures are invariably significant, but not very powerful (i.e. r = 0.5-0.7). Nonetheless, several recent studies have shown that appendicular bone mass measurements discriminate between spinal fracture and non-fracture at least as well as do spinal DPA measurements. Correlations of a given parameter with measured BMDspine are less important than those with true BMDspine. To establish the latter we made the following assumptions: (1) accuracy errors or SPA BMCarm and DPA BMDspine measurements of 2%-4% and 8%-10%, respectively; and (2) a measured biological variation of SD = 14% for both BMCarm and BMDspine, corresponding to that of healthy women at the menopause. On these assumptions, we found that a correlation between true BMCarm and true BMDspine at about r = 0.8-0.9 yields a correlation between measured BMCarm and measured BMDspine at about r = 0.6--corresponding to experimental data in healthy women at the menopause. Furthermore, we found that the correlation between DPA measured BMDspine and true BMDspine is about the same as that between the SPA measured BMCarm and the true BMDspine. Thus, with the assumptions given above, spinal (DPA) and fore-arm (SPA) measurements appears to predict equally the true BMDspine in healthy perimenopausal women.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1790412     DOI: 10.1007/bf03187470

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


  17 in total

1.  Bone mass measured by photon absorptiometry: comparison of forearm, heel, and spine.

Authors:  M A Hansen; B J Riis; K Overgaard; C Hassager; C Christiansen
Journal:  Scand J Clin Lab Invest       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 1.713

Review 2.  Consensus development conference: prophylaxis and treatment of osteoporosis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1987-10-10

3.  Postmenopausal estrogen replacement and breast cancer.

Authors:  E Barrett-Connor
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-08-03       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Rates of bone loss in normal women: evidence of accelerated trabecular bone loss after the menopause.

Authors:  L Nilas; C Christiansen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Invest       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 4.686

5.  Prediction of rapid bone loss in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  C Christiansen; B J Riis; P Rødbro
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1987-05-16       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Appendicular bone density and age predict hip fracture in women. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group.

Authors:  S R Cummings; D M Black; M C Nevitt; W S Browner; J A Cauley; H K Genant; S R Mascioli; J C Scott; D G Seeley; P Steiger
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Dual-photon Gd-153 absorptiometry of bone.

Authors:  H W Wahner; W L Dunn; R B Mazess; M Towsley; R Lindsay; L Markhard; D Dempster
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  The relation between forearm and vertebral mineral density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

Authors:  B E Nordin; J M Wishart; M Horowitz; A G Need; A Bridges; M Bellon
Journal:  Bone Miner       Date:  1988-10

9.  Detection of prefracture spinal osteoporosis using bone mineral absorptiometry.

Authors:  P D Ross; R D Wasnich; J M Vogel
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 6.741

10.  Discriminative ability of total body bone-mineral measured by dual photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  A Gotfredsen; J Pødenphant; L Nilas; C Christiansen
Journal:  Scand J Clin Lab Invest       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 1.713

View more
  8 in total

1.  Measurements of bone mineral density of the proximal femur by two commercially available dual energy X-ray absorptiometric systems.

Authors:  O L Svendsen; U Marslew; C Hassager; C Christiansen
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med       Date:  1992

Review 2.  Measurement of bone mineral density.

Authors:  C Hassager; C Christiansen
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 4.333

3.  Variability of vertebral and femoral postmenopausal bone loss: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  J M Pouillès; F Trémollières; C Ribot
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  Postmenopausal bone loss and the risk of osteoporosis.

Authors:  C Christiansen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  The influence of aortic calcification on spinal bone mineral density in vitro.

Authors:  H Hoshino; K Kushida; M Takahashi; T Ohishi; E Sugiyama; T Inoue
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  1996-07       Impact factor: 4.333

6.  Single X-ray absorptiometry: performance characteristics and comparison with single photon absorptiometry.

Authors:  J Borg; A Møllgaard; B J Riis
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  Bone loss. Quantitative imaging techniques for assessing bone mass in rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  C F Njeh; H K Genant
Journal:  Arthritis Res       Date:  2000-08-03

8.  Bone mineral density and risk of cardiovascular disease in men and women: the HUNT study.

Authors:  Laxmi Bhatta; Aivaras Cepelis; Sigrid A Vikjord; Vegard Malmo; Lars E Laugsand; Håvard Dalen; Arnulf Langhammer; Imre Janszky; Linn B Strand; Ben M Brumpton
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 8.082

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.