ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2019
Trends and Disparities in Self-Reported and Measured Osteoporosis among US Adults, 2007-2014.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Genetic Causal Association between Educational Attainment and Risk of 12 Common Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Trends in mortality with osteoporosis recorded as the underlying cause of death among adults aged 65 years and older in the United States, 1999-2024.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Risk of Osteoporosis-Related Fracture in Children and Adolescents with Intellectual Disability.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Association between DASH diet and metabolic syndrome in US adults: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Genetic Prediction of Osteoporosis by Anti-Müllerian Hormone Levels and Reproductive Factors in Women: A Mendelian Randomization Study.Calcified tissue international · 2024Article
- Comparison between linear regression and four different machine learning methods in selecting risk factors for osteoporosis in a Chinese female aged cohort.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
- Association between dietary inflammatory index and metabolic syndrome: Analysis of the NHANES 2005-2016.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Fractions of Shen-Sui-Tong-Zhi Formula Enhance OsteogenesisFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Thyroid Hormone Diseases and Osteoporosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Background: Studies examining osteoporosis trends among US adults by different socioeconomic status (SES) are limited. The prevalence of self-reported osteoporosis in the US is rarely reported. (2) Methods: Data from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (NHANES) between 2007-2008 and 2013-2014 cycles were analyzed. Age-adjusted prevalence of self-reported and that of measured osteoporosis were calculated overall and by sex, race/ethnicity, education attainment, and SES. (3) Results: The prevalence of self-reported osteoporosis was higher than that of measured osteoporosis in all three survey cycles for women, and in 2007-2008 and 2009-2010 for men. Participants with high school/GED or higher educational attainment had an increased prevalence of measured osteoporosis during the study period. Among all SES groups, participants with low family income (PIR < 1.3) had the highest prevalence of measured osteoporosis, and the prevalence increased from 49.3 per 1000 population to 71.8 per 1000 population during the study period. (4) Conclusions: The prevalence of self-reported osteoporosis was higher than that of measured osteoporosis in US adults between 2007 and 2014. The age-adjusted prevalence of measured osteoporosis increased in participants with the educational attainment of high school/GED or above, and individuals with low family income.
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.