Evaluation of bone mineral density of the lumbar spine and proximal femur in population‐based routine health examinations of healthy asians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To understand the peak bone mineral density (BMD) and annual loss of BMD of the lumbar spine (L-BMD) and the proximal femur (F-BMD) and the prevalence of osteoporosis in both sexes in Taipei City, Taiwan. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The medical records from a recent 3-year period of annual health examinations at a single institution were reviewed. A total of 1514 men (mean age 49.08 +/- 13.62) and 1955 women (48.07 +/- 14.12), who lived in the Taipei area, had no major systemic disorders, and who had undergone both L-BMD and F-BMD examinations, were recruited. RESULTS: In women, peak L-BMD (1.078 +/- 0.133 g/cm2) occurred in the 30 to 39-year age group, whereas peak F-BMD (0.873 +/- 0.101 g/cm2) occurred in the 17 to 29-year age group. In men, peak L-BMD (1.095 +/- 0.137 g/cm2) and F-BMD (0.989 +/- 0.140 g/cm2) both occurred in the 17 to 29-year age group. The estimated annual bone loss was 0.69% of peak L-BMD in women over 50 years; in the proximal femur this was 0.688% in women and 0.332% in men. In women over 60 years, approximately half of the population had osteoporosis in the lumbar spine. CONCLUSION: We report descriptive BMD data of a Chinese population recruited from a Taipei urban area who underwent routine health examination. The values are similar to or higher than those of Japanese, Canadian and Greek populations. L-BMD was lower than that in the Lebanese, and F-BMD of both sexes was lower than that reported in the Greek study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".