ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2023
Comparative analysis of bone outcomes between quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry from the UK Biobank cohort.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative analysis of bone density measurement techniques: a systematic review of quantitative ultrasound and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Pooled it
- The SINTER study: a recall-by-genotype design with multidimensional musculoskeletal phenotyping across internal-medicine outpatient clinics.European journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Osteoporosis: current diagnostic possibilities, a literature review.Przeglad menopauzalny = Menopause review · 2026Review
- Toe Grasp Strength and Its Association with Muscle Mass and Calcaneal Bone Status in Young Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2026Article
- Identification of novel vertebral development factors through UK Biobank candidate gene search and body imaging analysis.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus: comprehensive fracture risk relationships in UK Biobank.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2025Article
- Association of heel bone mineral density with incident dementia among ageing adults: a population-based study from the UK Biobank.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Article
- Article
- The Association Between Nutritional Risk and Bone Stiffness in Elderly Men and Women in a Population-Based Study in Northeast Germany.Nutrients · 2024Article
- In Vivo Assessment of Bone Quality Without X-rays.Current osteoporosis reports · 2024Review
- Adherence to the dietary approaches to stop hypertension and bone health in the Chinese elderly.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This large cohort study investigated reliability and validity of heel ultrasound to estimate bone mineral density in adults. Reliability calculated between left and right heels was relatively poor and so was criterion validity assessed relative to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Heel ultrasound should be used cautiously when estimating bone mineral density.
introductionCalcaneal quantitative ultrasound (QUS) may be used as a safe, low cost, and portable means to estimate bone mineral density (BMD) in large cohorts. The purpose of this study was to quantify the reliability and validity of QUS in comparison to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), which is the reference method for BMD measurement and diagnoses of osteopenia and osteoporosis.
methodsBone outcomes measured on the large UK Biobank cohort were used. The reliability of QUS estimated BMD was quantified by comparing values obtained from the left and right heel measured in the same session. Criterion validity was assessed through agreement between QUS and DXA, quantifying correlations, and sensitivity and specificity of osteopenia and osteoporosis diagnoses.
resultsReliability calculations were made using data from over 216,000 participants demonstrating similar QUS BMD values between left and right heels in the absolute scale (Sd of difference for men: 0.12 and 0.07 g·cm
conclusionsThe findings of this large comparative analysis identify that whilst calcaneal QUS has the potential to produce reliable absolute BMD measurements and demonstrate modest associations with DXA BMD measures, use of that information to make relative statements about participants in the context of the larger population or to appropriately diagnose osteopenia or osteoporosis may be severely limited.
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.