Modifiable Determinants of Bone Health in Women With Distal Radius Fracture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Distal radius fracture (DRF) is an early and independent predictor of future osteoporotic (OP) fractures. Currently, there are no studies evaluating the role of modifiable risk factors on OP fracture risk in postmenopausal women (PMW) with DRF. Purpose/Objectives: To determine the extent to which modifiable risk factors such as balance, muscle strength, and physical activity can explain variability in bone mineral density (BMD) among women with DRF. Materials and Methods: The study was designed as a cross-sectional investigation of baseline data. Women aged 50 to 80 years with DRF were assessed for balance, muscle strength (grip strength, plantar flexion), and physical activity using reliable and validated measures. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was used to assess areal BMD at the femoral neck (BMD-FN) and total hip (BMD-TH). Analysis: Stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to determine the extent to which modifiable risk factors (predictors) could explain variability in the BMD (outcome). Results: Women ( n = 67; mean age: 62.12 ± 7.45 years) were analyzed. Hand grip strength as an independent predictor explained 15% ( F = 11.26, P = .001) and 6% ( F = 4.18, P = .04) of total variability in BMD-FN and BMD-TH, respectively. Balance ( R 2 = .10, F = 4.35, P = .04) and hand grip strength ( R 2 = .32, F = 10.78, P = .003) explained significant variability in BMD-FN among 50- to 64-year-old ( n = 41) and among 65- to 80-year-old ( n = 25) PMW with DRF, respectively. Conclusions: Hand grip strength is the independent predictor of femoral neck and total hip BMD in PMW with DRF. Because hand grip strength and balance are modifiable factors that are related to bone health, they may represent useful prevention targets for hand therapists. We recommend evaluation of hand grip strength and balance as a component of OP risk factor assessment among women with DRF.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".