ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2024
Development and validation of an eight-item calcium screener to assess daily calcium intake of patients with osteoporosis in clinical practice.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2024. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ten tips to reduce fracture risk by non-pharmacologic interventions in CKD-associated osteoporosis.Clinical kidney journal · 2026Review
- Preparation optimization, structural characterization, stability and promoting calcium absorption mechanism of sturgeon cartilage peptide-calcium chelates.Food chemistry: X · 2026Article
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
objectiveTo validate a short food frequency questionnaire (screener) estimating daily average calcium intake from dietary sources to guide calcium supplementation of patients with osteoporosis in clinical practice.
methodsAn eight-item calcium screener was developed based on existing literature, food consumption data and expert opinion. Convergent validity was determined by comparison with 3-day food records using mean difference, Spearman's correlation coefficients (SCC) and Bland-Altman analysis. Test-retest reliability was assessed by SCC and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) to identify patients requiring calcium supplementation (<1200 mg dietary calcium intake/day).
resultsFifty-two patients filled out the eight-item calcium screener and the 3-day Food record (mean age of 66.8 ± 12.9 (SD)) and 38 patients filled out the screener twice for reliability analysis (mean age of 65.8 ± 12.8 (SD)). Dietary calcium intake between the calcium screener and food records showed a strong correlation (N = 52 patients, SCC = 0.53, p ≤ 0.001) and mean difference of 21 mg (p = 0.70). Bland-Altman analysis showed agreement within 95% confidence intervals for 49/52 comparisons (94%). Test-retest reliability of the calcium screener was excellent (SCC = 0.96, p ≤ 0.001; ICC = 0.99, p ≤ 0.001).
conclusionThe calcium screener shows good convergent validity, reliability and feasibility to estimate daily calcium intake of patients with osteoporosis in routine clinical practice.
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.