Impact of adding distal forearm DXA to hip and spine measurements on DXA report
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard modality for non-invasive diagnosis of osteoporosis but controversy exists about the optimal site (s) for bone mineral density (BMD) measurement. The objective was to find out impact of adding distal forearm BMD to hip and spine measurements on final diagnosis of a DXA study. This prospective study recruited 279 consecutive patients [female 256 (92%); male 23 (8%)] with a mean age of 63.25 ± 10.62 years from April 2011 to April 2012. The BMD was measured over hip (total hip and femoral neck), spine and distal forearm in all patients. Based on T-Score values of hip and spine (2 sites), diagnosis was normal in 34%, low bone mass in 40% and osteoporosis in 26% patients. However, adding distal forearm BMD and T-score (3 sites), diagnosis was normal in 28%, low bone mass in 37% and osteoporosis in 35%. Therefore, distal forearm BMD has upstaged the diagnosis from normal to low bone mass in 14%, from normal to osteoporosis in 2% and from low bone mass to osteoporosis in 18% patients. We conclude that combining distal forearm BMD with spine and hip can identify more patients with low bone mass or osteoporosis.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 it