Sedentary behavior does not predict low BMD nor fracture—population-based Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sedentary behavior (SB) or sitting is associated with multiple unfavorable health outcomes. Bone tissue responds to imposed gravitational and muscular strain with there being some evidence suggesting a causal link between SB and poor bone health. However, there are no population-based data on the longitudinal relationship between SB, bone change, and incidence of fragility fractures. This study aimed to examine the associations of sitting/SB (defined as daily sitting time), areal BMD (by DXA), and incident low trauma (fragility) osteoporotic fractures (excluding hands, feet, face, and head). We measured baseline (1995-7) and 10-yr self-reported SB, femoral neck (FN), total hip (TH), and lumbar spine (L1-L4) BMD in 5708 women and 2564 men aged 25 to 80+ yr from the population-based, nationwide, 9-center Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Incident 10-yr fragility fracture data were obtained from 4624 participants; >80% of fractures were objectively confirmed by medical records or radiology reports. Vertebral fractures were confirmed by qualitative morphological methods. All analyses were stratified by sex. Multivariable regression models assessed SB-BMD relationships; Cox proportional models were fit for fracture risk. Models were adjusted for age, height, BMI, physical activity, and sex-specific covariates. Women in third/fourth quartiles had lower adjusted FN BMD versus women with the least SB (first quartile); women in the SB third quartile had lower adjusted TH BMD. Men in the SB third quartile had lower adjusted FN BMD than those in SB first quartile. Neither baseline nor stable 10-yr SB was related to BMD change nor to incident fragility fractures. Increased sitting (SB) in this large, population-based cohort was associated with lower baseline FN BMD. Stable SB was not associated with 10-yr BMD loss nor increased fragility fracture. In conclusion, habitual adult SB was not associated with subsequent loss of BMD nor increased risk of fracture.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".