ArticleCureus2023
Dual Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Scanning for Osteoporosis Detection: Analysis of Patients at a Tertiary Care Hospital.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Enhancing Osteoblast Differentiation from Adipose-Derived Stem Cells Using Hydrogels and Photobiomodulation: Overcoming In Vitro Limitations for Osteoporosis Treatment.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scanning is a rapid and accurate noninvasive procedure utilized to measure bone mineral density (BMD) and diagnose osteoporosis. The primary objective of this study was to assess the prevalence of osteoporosis in different regions of the body using DEXA scanning in patients attending a tertiary care private hospital. Additionally, we aimed to raise awareness about approved diagnostic methods for osteoporosis. METHODOLOGY: For this retrospective study, a sample size of 384 participants was determined. The selection of participants was based on convenience sampling, considering their availability and accessibility. Data were collected from adult patients aged 18 years and above who underwent DEXA scanning. The information was compiled using Microsoft Excel, obtained from the patient's treating physicians, and evaluated by two medical graduates. Statistical analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 26.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY).
resultsThe findings unveiled an overarching osteoporosis prevalence of 38.5%, accompanied by distinctive figures of 38.7%, 8.9%, and 38.4% in the lumbar, hip, and forearm regions, respectively. Furthermore, the occurrence of osteopenia was found in 33% of participants in the lumbar region, 35.1% in the hip region, and 39.7% in the forearm region. Additionally, no significant association was found between gender and overall osteoporosis prevalence, suggesting that the susceptibility to osteoporosis did not significantly differ between genders. Moreover, the study emphasized the variations in bone density across different skeletal regions, with the forearm region displaying the lowest mean T-score and Z-score.
conclusionsThe results of this study on osteoporosis prevalence in the lumbar, hip, and forearm regions indicate varying rates among these skeletal sites. Notably, both male and female patients demonstrated an equal susceptibility to developing osteoporosis. Interestingly, the forearm region emerged as the most common site for osteoporosis in males (34.6%), while the lumbar region was the most common in females (41.6%).
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.