Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21492428›Full record

Trial reportNutrition journal2011

Changes in total body bone mineral density following a common bone health plan with two versions of a unique bone health supplement: a comparative effectiveness research study.

Joel E Michalek, Harry G Preuss, Harry A Croft, Patti L Keith, Samuel C Keith, Monika Dapilmoto, Nicholas V Perricone, Robert B Leckie, Gilbert R Kaats

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nutrition journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01114685 (Bone Mineral Density), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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.

NCT01114685 nacompletednot on this map

Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Changes in a Bone Health Plan Using Two Versions of a Bone Health Supplement: A Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorIntegrative Health Technologies, Inc.Ran2006 to 2010Enrolled354ConditionsOsteopeniaArmsAlgaeCal-1, AlgaeCal-2
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joel E MichalekIntegrative Health Technologies, Inc,, 4940 Broadway, San Antonio, Texas 78209, USA.
Harry G Preuss
Harry A Croft
Patti L Keith
Samuel C Keith
Monika Dapilmoto
Nicholas V Perricone
Robert B Leckie
Gilbert R Kaats
Integrative Health Technologies (United States) · USGeorgetown University · USMichigan State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans that: (1) improve nutrition, (2) increase health literacy and, (3) increase physical activity. This study is a response to this call to action.

methodsAfter signing an informed consent, 158 adults agreed to follow an open-label bone-health plan for six months after taking a DXA test of bone density, a 43-chemistry blood test panel and a quality of life inventory (AlgaeCal 1). Two weeks after the last subject completed, a second group of 58 was enrolled and followed the identical plan, but with a different bone-health supplement (AlgaeCal 2).

resultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline bone mineral density (BMD) or in variables related to BMD (age, sex, weight, percent body fat, fat mass, or fat-free mass). In both groups, no significant differences in BMD or related variables were found between volunteers and non-volunteers or between those who completed per protocol and those who were lost to attrition.Both groups experienced a significant positive mean annualized percent change (MAPC) in BMD compared to expectation [AlgaeCal 1: 1.15%, p = 0.001; AlgaeCal 2: 2.79%, p = 0.001]. Both groups experienced a positive MAPC compared to baseline, but only AlgaeCal 2 experienced a significant change [AlgaeCal 1: 0.48%, p = 0.14; AlgaeCal 2: 2.18%, p < 0.001]. The MAPC in AlgaeCal 2 was significantly greater than that in AlgaeCal 1 (p = 0.005). The MAPC contrast between compliant and partially compliant subjects was significant for both plans (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003 respectively). No clinically significant changes in a 43-panel blood chemistry test were found nor were there any changes in self-reported quality of life in either group.

conclusionsFollowing The Plan for six months with either version of the bone health supplement was associated with significant increases in BMD as compared to expected and, in AlgaeCal 2, the increase from baseline was significantly greater than the increase from baseline in AlgaeCal 1. Increased compliance was associated with greater increases in BMD in both groups. No adverse effects were reported in either group.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01114685.

Indexed as

Bone DensityComparative Effectiveness ResearchDietary SupplementsDisease ManagementAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdultAgedAge FactorsBody WeightFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality of LifeSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID21492428
PMCPMC3090326
OpenAlexW2097289518

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.