Bone mass, bone strength, and their relationship in developing CD-1 mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optimizing nutrition during development may provide effective prevention strategies to protect against osteoporosis during later life. Because the mouse model is commonly used to test nutritional interventions on bone health, the overall objective of this study was to determine how bone develops during the first 4 months of life by assessing bone mass (bone mineral content (BMC) and bone mineral density (BMD)) and biomechanical strength properties such as peak load in male and female CD-1 mice. Bone outcomes were assessed at 1 month intervals from 1 to 4 months of age. Femur and spine BMC and BMD at 3 months were similar to 4 months, indicating that the accumulation of bone mass occurs primarily during the first 3 months of life. In contrast, the timing of changes in peak load, a measure of bone strength, varied by skeletal site. Regression analyses demonstrated that femur BMC is a significant predictor of femur peak load at the femur midpoint and neck. The study findings suggest that nutritional interventions aimed at optimizing peak bone mass to prevent osteoporosis may be most effective during pubertal growth.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".