VALIDATION OF REFERENCE STANDARDS FOR TOTAL BODY BMC IN BOYS AND GIRLS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to validate reference standards for Total Body (TB) Bone Mineral Content (BMC) developed from the Saskatchewan Pediatric Bone Mineral Accural Study. TB BMC was measured by DXA (Hologic 2000 QDR array mode analyzed with software version 6.67A). The reference standards provide a multivariate prediction of normal TB BMC Including age, somatic and maturity indices within gender specific equations. To cross-validate the prediction equations, independent samples of healthy male(n = 39) and female (n = 35) subjects were used. The male sample had an age range from 9 to 15 with mean values for age, 11.285 y, height, 148.6 cm and weight, 40.1 kg. The female sample had an age range from 9 to 17 with mean values for age, 12.560 y, height, 155.2 cm and weight, 44.7 kg. T-tests between actual TB BMC and the predicted TB BMC for males and females indicated no significant difference. The r2 value was 0.95 and 0.93 for males and females with a mean and standard deviation of the residuals of −13.8 ± 100 and 40.3 ± 166 respectively. All data points for both genders fell within the 95% prediction interval and were evenly distributed above and below the mean regression line. These results support the robustness of the reference standards for males and females. Supported by National Health Research and Development Program
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".