ArticleBone reports2016
Assessing the inter- and intra-animal variability of
Article in Bone reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Added Value of Impact Microindentation in the Evaluation of Bone Fragility: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020Pooled it
- In Vivo Assessment of Cortical Bone Fragility.Current osteoporosis reports · 2020Review
- Effects of combination treatment with alendronate and raloxifene on skeletal properties in a beagle dog model.PloS one · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The OsteoProbe is a second-generation reference point indentation (RPI) device without a reference probe that is designed to simplify RPI testing for clinical use. Successful clinical implementation of the OsteoProbe would benefit from a better understanding of how its output, bone material strength index (BMSi), relates to the material properties of bone and under what conditions it reliably correlates with fracture risk. Large animal models have the potential to help fill this knowledge gap, as cadaveric studies are retrospective and limited by incomplete patient histories (including the potential use of bone matrix altering drugs such as bisphosphonates). The goal of this study was to assess the intra and inter-animal variability of OsteoProbe measures in untreated beagle dogs (n=12), and to evaluate this variability in comparison to traditional mechanical testing. OsteoProbe measurements were performed in vivo on the left tibia of each dog and repeated 6 months later on the day of sacrifice. Within-animal variation of BMSi (CV of 5-10 indents) averaged 8.9 and 9.0% at the first and second timepoints, respectively. In contrast, inter-animal variation of BMSi increased from 5.3% to 9.1%. The group variation of BMSi was on par with that of traditional 3-point mechanical testing; inter-animal variation was 10% for ultimate force, 13% for stiffness, and 12% for total work as measured on the femur. There was no significant change in mean BMSi after 6 months, but the individual change with time across the 12 dogs was highly variable, ranging from -12.4% to +21.7% (Mean 1.6%, SD 10.6%). No significant correlations were found between in vivo tibia BMSi and femur mechanical properties measured by ex vivo 3-pt bending, but this may be a limitation of sample size or the tests being performed on different bones. No relationship was found between BMSi and tissue mineral density, but a strong positive correlation was found between BMSi and tibia cortical thickness (ρ=0.706, p=0.010). This report shows that while the OsteoProbe device has inter-individual variability quite similar to that of traditional mechanical testing, the longitudinal changes show high levels of heterogeneity across subjects. We further highlight the need for standardization in post-testing data processing and further study of the relationships between OsteoProbe and traditional mechanical testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.