Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25739343›Full record

ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2015

How Does Bone Strength Compare Across Sex, Site, and Ethnicity?

Stephen H Schlecht, Erin M R Bigelow, Karl J Jepsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Effect of Vitamin A on Fracture Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Applying a Health Equity Lens to Work-Related Motor Vehicle Safety in the United States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Synonymous Mutations of PorcineFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. A longitudinal comparison of appendicular bone growth and markers of strength through adolescence in a South African cohort using radiogrammetry and pQCT.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Femoral Neck External Size but not aBMD Predicts Structural and Mass Changes for Women Transitioning Through Menopause.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2017
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen H SchlechtDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Michigan, 109 Zina Pitcher Place, Room 2148 BSRB, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA, sschlech@med.umich.edu.
Erin M R Bigelow
Karl J Jepsen
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

Tissue Engineering and RegenerationT32DE007057 · NIDCR · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI DAVID H. KOHN · 1985 to 2026
$17.3M
GENETIC DETERMINATION OF SKELETAL FRAGILITYR01AR044927 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI JEPSEN, KARL J · 2002 to 2014
$4.3M
Bone Robustness as a Biomarker of Skeletal Aging and FragilityR01AR065424 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI JEPSEN, KARL J · 2014 to 2018
$2.4M
Genetic Determination of Skeletal FragilityR56AR044927 · NIAMS · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI JEPSEN, KARL J · 2009 to 2009
$500k
GENETIC DETERMINATION OF SKELETAL FRAGILITYR29AR044927 · NIAMS · MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU · PI JEPSEN, KARL J · 1998 to 2002
$268k
NIAMS NIH HHS AR065424NIAMS NIH HHS AR44927NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR044927NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR065424NIAMS NIH HHS R29 AR044927NIAMS NIH HHS R56 AR044927NIDCR NIH HHS T32 DE007057
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe risk of fragility fractures in the United States is approximately 2.5 times greater among black and white women compared with their male counterparts. On average, men of both ethnicities have wider bones of greater cortical mass compared with the narrower bones of lower cortical mass among women. However, it remains uncertain whether the low cortical area observed in the long bones of women is consistent with their narrower bone diameter or if their cortical area is reduced beyond that which is expected for the sex differences in body size and external bone size. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked (1) do black and white women consistently have narrower bones of less strength across long bones compared with black and white men; and (2) do all long bones of black and white women have reduced cortical area compared with black and white men?

methodsPeripheral quantitative CT was used to quantify bone strength and cross-sectional morphology from the major long bones of 125 white and 115 black adult men and women (20-35 years of age). Regression analyses were used to test for differences in bone strength and cortical area after for adjusting for either body size, bone size, or both.

resultsAfter adjusting bone strength for body size, regression analyses showed that black women had lower bone strength compared with black men (women: mean=298.7-25,522 mg HA mm4, 95% confidence interval [CI], 270-27,692 mg HA mm4; men: mean = 381.6-30,945 mg HA mm4, 95% CI, 358.2-32,853 mg HA mm4; percent difference=12%-38%, p=0.06-0.0001). Similarly, white women also had lower bone strength compared with white men (women: mean=229.5-22,892 mg HA mm4, 95% CI, 209.3-24,539 mg HA mm4; men: mean=314.3-29,986 mg HA mm4, 95% CI, 297.3-31,331 mg HA mm4; percent difference=27%-49%, p=0.0001). All long bones of women for both ethnicities showed lower cortical area compared with men. After accounting for both body size and external bone size, black women (women: mean=43.25-357.70 mm2, 95% CI, 41.45-367.52 mm2; men: mean=48.06-400.10 mm2, 95% CI, 46.67-408.72; percent difference=6%-25%, p=0.02-0.0001) and white women (women: mean=38.53-350.10 mm2, 95% CI, 36.99-359.80 mm2; men: mean=42.06-394.30 mm2, 95% CI, 40.95-402.10 mm2; percent difference=6%-22%, p=0.02-0.0001) were shown to have lower cortical area than their male counterparts. Therefore, the long bones of women are not only more slender than those of men, but also show a reduced cortical area that is 6% to 25% greater than expected for their external size, depending on the bone being considered.

conclusionsThe long bones of females are not just a more slender version of male long bones. Women have less cortical area than expected for their body size and bone size, which in part explains their reduced bone strength when compared with the more robust bones of men. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The outcome of this assessment may be clinically important for the development of diagnostics and treatment regimens used to combat fractures. Future work should look at how the relationship among parameters reported here translates to the more fracture-prone metaphyseal regions.

Indexed as

Black or African AmericanBone DevelopmentHealth Status DisparitiesWhite PeopleAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaBody SizeBone and BonesBone DensityFemaleFractures, BoneHumansMaleRisk FactorsSex FactorsTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID25739343
PMCPMC4488216
OpenAlexW2105655609

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.