ArticleJournal of family medicine and primary care2022
Comparison of bone mineral density in forearm and hip regions and evaluation of area of these 2 sites.
Article in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Osteoporosis is a common disease among middle-aged and older people. Because bone mineral density (BMD) is obtained by dividing bone mineral content by area, accurate measurement of the surface of the studied area plays an important role. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the area of the hip and forearm regions based on gender and height. Methods: In a cross-sectional descriptive study of 758 individuals (702 female and 56 male, divided into 2 groups of ≥50 years old and <50 years old), experienced personnel performed densitometry of the forearm and femur using a Hologic device. The results were statistically analyzed using SPSS software version 21. Results: In women ≥50 years old who were of white race, one-third of the forearm BMD showed moderate agreement with the femoral neck BMD, and in this group, total forearm BMD showed moderate agreement with the femoral neck BMD. In women <50 years old of Caucasian race, one-third of the forearm BMD showed good agreement with the femoral trochanter. In the same group of individuals, total forearm BMD also showed very good agreement with the femoral trochanter. In women <50 years old of white race, one-third of the forearm BMD showed good agreement with all 4 regions in the femur (trochanter, intertrochanteric, neck, total), and in the same group of individuals, total forearm BMD showed very good agreement with all 4 regions of the femur. Conclusion: According to the results obtained for comparison of forearm one-third with hip areas, it seems that simultaneous measurement of the forearm one-third area and different hip areas increases the accuracy of total BMD measurement.
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.