Pediatric data for dual X-ray absorptiometric measures of normal lumbar bone mineral density in children under 5 years of age using the lunar prodigy densitometer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Knowledge of physiological variations of bone mineral density (BMD) in newborns and infants is necessary to evaluate pathological changes associated with fractures. Limited reference data for children under 5 years old are available. This study provides normative data of lumbar BMD for the Lunar Prodigy in young children under 5 years old. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We assessed cross-sectionally 155 healthy children (77 boys, 80% Caucasian), ranging in age from newborn to the age of 5 years. Lumbar bone mineral content (BMC) and areal BMD were measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry using a Lunar Prodigy absorptiometer. Volumetric BMD was calculated using the Kroeger and Carter methods. RESULTS: BMC and areal BMD increased from birth to 5 years (p<0.001). Volumetric BMD did not change with age. BMD and BMC correlated with age, weight and height (R(2)≥0.85 for all), with a maximum gain between the ages of 1 and 4 years, which did not follow the same pattern as height velocity. We did not find significant sex difference for any of the three measured parameters. CONCLUSION: This study provides normative data for lumbar spine densitometry of infants and young children using the Lunar Prodigy DXA system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".