MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4412488414 · doi:10.1093/jbmr/zjaf095

Parity and lactation cause transient bone loss but are not risk factors for osteoporosis later in life

2025· article· en· W4412488414 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsOsteoporosisLactationMedicineParity (physics)Bone densityEndocrinologyPregnancyBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The skeleton is a storehouse of minerals and alkali that is borrowed from when needed.1 To a marked extent during lactation, and to a modest degree during pregnancy, a woman’s skeleton is resorbed to provide calcium and other minerals to her offspring. Whereas most calcium in a newborn’s skeleton derives from the maternal diet during pregnancy, most calcium in milk is resorbed from the maternal skeleton during lactation.1 Bone resorption similarly provides rapidly needed calcium to other lactating mammals, egg layers, and animals with antlers and horns. After these physiologically programmed losses, the skeleton is later restored to its prior mineral content and strength. Longitudinal cohort studies in women have shown that during pregnancy, areal BMD (aBMD) declines slightly or remains unchanged, while during 6 mo of breastfeeding, the lumbar spine drops 5%-10% with smaller losses at the hip and radius.1 These reductions in aBMD and implied bone strength are usually without clinical consequences, although women do rarely present with fragility fractures during reproductive cycles. About 20% of such fractures (largely vertebral compressions) occur during pregnancy or puerperium, while 80% occur while lactating.2 Longitudinal studies also show that the skeleton typically returns to its prior aBMD within 6-12 mo after weaning.1 Limited HR-pQCT studies have found post-weaning improvement in skeletal microarchitecture, but some reductions in microarchitecture appear to persist.3

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research→Same topicBone health and osteoporosis research→French-language works237,207→