The roles of adulthood behavioural factors and familial influences in bone density among men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A primary strategy in osteoporosis prevention is advice on exercise, smoking, and calcium intake, although its practical value is unclear. AIM: To investigate the roles of such factors on bone density (BMD) after considering the influences of familial aggregation (combined effects of genetics and familial influences) in Finnish men 35-69 years old. METHODS: We selected 105 male monozygotic twin pairs, with discordance in suspected determinants. RESULTS: Dietary calcium was associated with BMD of the femoral neck; and body weight and lifetime frequency of endurance and ball game sport activities were associated with both femoral neck and lumbar BMD. Occupational loading and smoking were associated with neither. However, age and familial aggregation explained 73% of the variance of BMD in both the femoral neck and lumbar spine; calcium intake explained 1% in femoral neck and lifetime exercise 1% in lumbar spine. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of dietary calcium and physical activity that are not 'embedded' in the familial influences had very modest effects on the variance of BMD. Thus our chances of influencing BMD in later adulthood by targeting behavioural habits are likely to be limited. Interventions focused on childhood and the family unit may achieve more beneficial long-term results.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".