ArticleClinical medicine insights. Arthritis and musculoskeletal disorders2019
Comparison of Bone Mineral Densitometry at 2 Sites Versus 3 Sites in Patients Suspicious for Osteoporosis.
Article in Clinical medicine insights. Arthritis and musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- The added value of distal radius bone mineral density for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in patients with a history of fragility fracture.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- One-third Radius bone mineral density measurement utility in the diagnosis of osteoporosis: a comparative analysis with femoral and lumbar spine bone mineral density.The Libyan journal of medicine · 2025Article
- Associations of Habitual Skeletal Loading with Bone Changes during the Menopausal Transition: A Follow-Up Study.Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2025Article
- Opportunistic hand radiographs to screen for low forearm bone mineral density: a prospective and retrospective cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Managing Early Onset Osteoporosis: The Impact of Premature Ovarian Insufficiency on Bone Health.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Comparison of bone mineral density in forearm and hip regions and evaluation of area of these 2 sites.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2022Article
- Prevalence of osteoporosis and osteopenia in elderly patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2022Article
- Low bone mineral density and its related factors in adults with congenital heart disease in Vietnam: A cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2022Article
- Particulate Air Pollution and Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2021Review
- MEPE loss-of-function variant associates with decreased bone mineral density and increased fracture risk.Nature communications · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn this study, we aim to evaluate the bone mineral density (BMD) results of 2 standard sites with 3 sites including wrist in diagnosing osteoporosis.
methodsWe evaluated the BMD results of 1272 individuals referred for suspected osteoporosis between 2012 and 2015. Those individuals were included with BMD at lumbar spine, femur neck, and wrist. Bone mineral density was measured using a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) device. Bone mineral density and
resultsThere was significant correlation between wrist
conclusionsWe observed discordance between BMD measurements of 2 sites and 3 sites, with latter detecting more cases with osteoporosis. In fact, measurement of
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.