Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15293093›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2004

Bone status in rheumatoid arthritis assessed at peripheral sites by three different quantitative ultrasound devices.

O R Madsen, C Suetta, C Egsmose, J S Lorentzen, O H Sørensen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

O R MadsenOsteoporosis Research Clinic, Hvidovre University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. rintek@dadlnet.dk
C Suetta
C Egsmose
J S Lorentzen
O H Sørensen
Hvidovre Hospital · DKBispebjerg Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is characterized by periarticular and generalized loss of bone mass. Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) has been introduced as a method for the assessment of bone status and fracture risk. In this cross-sectional study bone status was assessed by QUS at different peripheral sites in 27 women with RA (mean disease duration 15 years) and in 36 healthy women matched for age, height and weight. Speed of sound (SOS, m/s), broadband ultrasound attenuation (BUA, dB/MHz) and stiffness of the calcaneus were assessed by a Lunar Achilles device. Amplitude-dependent SOS (Ad-SOS, m/s) of the second to fifth phalanx was measured by a DBM Sonic 1200, and SOS of the distal forearm and third phalanx was measured by a Omnisense multisite scanner. Bone mass (g/cm2 or g) of the hip, spine, distal forearm and total body was measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. QUS values were significantly reduced in RA at most sites ( p<0.005-0.001), but between-group differences were small, and large overlaps between the groups were noticed. After correction for bone mass, the observed differences remained statistically significant for the calcaneus and distal radius ( p<0.05). Independent associations between ultrasound measures and markers of disease activity were not demonstrated. In conclusion, bone status as assessed by QUS was compromised in RA, but whether ultrasound transmission may serve as a marker of disease progression and fracture risk in the individual patient remains to be clarified in prospective studies.

Indexed as

Bone DensityAbsorptiometry, PhotonAgedArthritis, RheumatoidCalcaneusCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFingersHumansUltrasonography

Identifiers

PMID15293093
OpenAlexW2153590951

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.