Tracking of spaceflight-induced bone remodeling reveals a limited time frame for recovery of resorption sites in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical unloading causes bone loss, but it remains unclear whether disuse-induced changes to bone microstructure are permanent or can be recovered upon reloading. We examined bone loss and recovery in 17 astronauts using time-lapsed high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography and biochemical markers to determine whether disuse-induced changes are permanent. During 6 months in microgravity, resorption was threefold higher than formation. Upon return to Earth, targeted bone formation occurred in high mechanical strain areas, with 31.8% of bone formed in the first 6 months after flight at sites resorbed during spaceflight, significantly higher than the 2.7% observed 6 to 12 months after return. Limited bone recovery at resorption sites after 6 months on Earth indicates a restricted window for reactivating bone remodeling factors in humans. Incomplete skeletal recovery may arise from these arrested remodeling sites, representing potential targets for new interventions, thus providing means to counteract this long-term health risk for astronauts.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".