Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34786596›Full record

ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2021

New technology REMS for bone evaluation compared to DXA in adult women for the osteoporosis diagnosis: a real-life experience.

Débora Meira Ramos Amorim, Eliane Naomi Sakane, Sergio Setsuo Maeda, Marise Lazaretti Castro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Demographic determinants of REMS-derived BMD and fragility score.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Débora Meira Ramos AmorimDepartment of Endocrinology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. deboramramorim@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8962-0561
Eliane Naomi SakaneDepartment of Endocrinology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1834-4410
Sergio Setsuo MaedaDepartment of Endocrinology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2669-4245
Marise Lazaretti CastroDepartment of Endocrinology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9186-2834
Universidade Federal de São Paulo · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis is a prevalent skeletal disorder in postmenopausal women. REMS represents a potential technology for osteoporosis diagnosis in clinical practice.

objectiveTo assess the accuracy of Radiofrequency Echographic Multi Spectrometry (REMS) technology in diagnosing osteoporosis in comparison with dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) on a population of Brazilian women.

methodsA population of women age ranged between 30 and 80 was recruited at DXA Service of São Paulo School-Hospital, Brazil. They underwent REMS and DXA scans at the axial sites. The REMS accuracy for the osteoporosis diagnosis was evaluated in comparison with DXA on both sites. The intra-operator and inter-operator coefficient of variation (CV) was also calculated.

resultsA total of 343 patients were enrolled in the study. Erroneous scans due to poor quality acquisitions with both methods or to other technical reasons were excluded; 227 lumbar spine exams and 238 hip exams were acceptable for comparison analysis. The comparison between REMS and DXA outcomes showed that the average difference in BMD (expressed as bias±1.96 SD) was -0.026±0.179g/cm

conclusionThe REMS approach had high accuracy for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in comparison with DXA in adult women. According to our results, this new technology has shown to be a promising alternative for populations without access to DXA densitometry.

Indexed as

OsteoporosisOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalAbsorptiometry, PhotonAdultBone DensityBrazilFemaleFemur NeckHumansLumbar VertebraeSpectrum AnalysisTechnologyBone mineral densityDual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)Osteoporosis diagnosisRadiofrequency Echographic Multi Spectrometry (REMS)Ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID34786596
OpenAlexW3212202642

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.