MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Bone mineral density, urinary sodium, and urinary calcium in healthy young Asian and Caucasian women

2010· article· en· W2293491916 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Susan I. Barr, Jennifer L. Bedford

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsUrinary systemBone mineralMedicineUrinary calciumCalciumInternal medicineUrineBone densityEndocrinologyExcretionSodiumOsteoporosisPhysiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sodium (Na) intake has been linked to bone density through effects on urinary calcium (Ca) excretion, but few data are available in healthy young women. We assessed 24‐hr urinary Na excretion and its relationship with urinary Ca and areal bone mineral density (aBMD) at the total body, lumbar spine and total hip in a cross‐sectional study. 110 healthy non‐obese Asian and Caucasian women completed timed 24‐hr urine collections which were analyzed for Na and Ca. Dietary intakes were estimated using the Diet History Questionnaire, a validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ), and aBMD was measured using dual energy x‐ray absorptiometry. Urinary Na was 2968 ± 1090 mg/d, significantly higher than intake of 2670 ± 1088 mg/d assessed by FFQ. Neither urinary Na nor Na intake differed between Asians and Caucasians. Dietary intakes correlated with 24‐hr urinary losses for both Na (r = 0.23, p = 0.017) and Ca (r = 0.21, p = 0.025). Controlling for calcium intake, urinary Na correlated positively with urinary Ca (r = 0.26, p = 0.007) and negatively with hip aBMD (r = −0.23, p = 0.015). Associations with total body (r = −0.16) and spine (r = −0.10) aBMD were also negative, but not significant. In conclusion, 24‐hr urinary Na (a proxy for intake) is associated with higher urinary Ca loss in young women, and may affect aBMD. Supported by Canadian Institutes of Health Research 79563.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicNutritional Studies and Diet→French-language works237,207→