MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402288957 · doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjae143

Short-term risk of fracture is increased by deficits in cortical and trabecular bone microarchitecture independent of DXA BMD and FRAX: Bone Microarchitecture International Consortium (BoMIC) prospective cohorts

2024· article· en· W4402288957 on OpenAlexaff
Marine Sarfati, Roland Chapurlat, Alyssa B. Dufour, Elisabeth Sornay‐Rendu, Blandine Merle, Steven K. Boyd, Danielle E. Whittier, David A. Hanley, David Goltzman, Paweł Szulc, Andy Kin On Wong, Éric Lespessailles, Sundeep Khosla, Serge Ferrari, Emmanuel Biver, Claes Ohlsson, Mattias Lorentzon, Dan Mellström, Maria Nethander, Elizabeth J. Samelson, Douglas P. Kiel, Marian T. Hannan, Mary Bouxsein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkMcGill University Health CentreAlberta Bone and Joint Health InstituteUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteHospices Civils de LyonNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthAgence Nationale de la RechercheAmgen
KeywordsMedicineFRAXOsteoporosisFemoral neckBone mineralIncidence (geometry)Cumulative incidenceProspective cohort studyHazard ratioBone densityCohortInternal medicineSurgeryDentistryOsteoporotic fractureConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identifying individuals at risk for short-term fracture is essential to offer prompt beneficial treatment, especially since many fractures occur in those without osteoporosis by DXA-aBMD. We evaluated whether deficits in bone microarchitecture and density predict short-term fracture risk independent of the clinical predictors, DXA-BMD and FRAX. We combined data from eight cohorts to conduct a prospective study of bone microarchitecture at the distal radius and tibia (by HR-pQCT) and 2-year incidence of fracture (non-traumatic and traumatic) in 7327 individuals (4824 women, 2503 men, mean 69 ± 9 years). We estimated sex-specific hazard ratios (HR) for associations between bone measures and 2-year fracture incidence, adjusted for age, cohort, height, and weight, and then additionally adjusted for FN aBMD or FRAX for major osteoporotic fracture. Only 7% of study participants had FN T-score ≤ -2.5, whereas 53% had T-scores between -1.0 and -2.5 and 37% had T-scores ≥-1.0. Two-year cumulative fracture incidence was 4% (296/7327). Each SD decrease in radius cortical bone measures increased fracture risk by 38%-76% for women and men. After additional adjustment for FN-aBMD, risks remained increased by 28%-61%. Radius trabecular measures were also associated with 2-year fracture risk independently of FN-aBMD in women (HRs range: 1.21 per SD for trabecular separation to 1.55 for total vBMD). Decreased failure load (FL) was associated with increased fracture risk in both women and men (FN-aBMD ranges of adjusted HR = 1.47-2.42). Tibia measurement results were similar to radius results. Findings were also similar when models were adjusted for FRAX. In older adults, FL and HR-pQCT measures of cortical and trabecular bone microarchitecture and density with strong associations to short-term fractures improved fracture prediction beyond aBMD and FRAX. Thus, HR-pQCT may be a useful adjunct to traditional assessment of short-term fracture risk in older adults, including those with T-scores above the osteoporosis range.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207