Sex Differences and Growth-Related Adaptations in Bone Microarchitecture, Geometry, Density, and Strength From Childhood to Early Adulthood: A Mixed Longitudinal HR-pQCT Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sex differences in bone strength and fracture risk are well documented. However, we know little about bone strength accrual during growth and adaptations in bone microstructure, density, and geometry that accompany gains in bone strength. Thus, our objectives were to (1) describe growth related adaptations in bone microarchitecture, geometry, density, and strength at the distal tibia and radius in boys and girls; and (2) compare differences in adaptations in bone microarchitecture, geometry, density, and strength between boys and girls. We used HR-pQCT at the distal tibia (8% site) and radius (7% site) in 184 boys and 209 girls (9 to 20 years old at baseline). We aligned boys and girls on a common maturational landmark (age at peak height velocity [APHV]) and fit a mixed effects model to these longitudinal data. Importantly, boys showed 28% to 63% greater estimated bone strength across 12 years of longitudinal growth. Boys showed 28% to 80% more porous cortices compared with girls at both sites across all biological ages, except at the radius at 9 years post-APHV. However, cortical density was similar between boys and girls at all ages at both sites, except at 9 years post-APHV at the tibia when girls' values were 2% greater than boys'. Boys showed 13% to 48% greater cortical and total bone area across growth. Load-to-strength ratio was 26% to 27% lower in boys at all ages, indicating lower risk of distal forearm fracture compared with girls. Contrary to previous HR-pQCT studies that did not align boys and girls at the same biological age, we did not observe sex differences in Ct.BMD. Boys' superior bone size and strength compared with girls may confer them a protective advantage. However, boys' consistently more porous cortices may contribute to their higher fracture incidence during adolescence. Large prospective studies using HR-pQCT that target boys and girls who have sustained a fracture are needed to verify this. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".