| Title |
DXA-Based Measurements in Diabetes: Can They Predict Fracture Risk?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Calcified Tissue International, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00223-016-0191-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
G. Isanne Schacter, William D. Leslie |
| Abstract |
In the absence of a fragility fracture, osteoporosis is usually diagnosed from bone mineral density (BMD) measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporosis is an increasingly prevalent disease, as is diabetes [in particular type 2 diabetes (T2D)], in part due to aging populations worldwide. It has been suggested that an increased risk of fracture may be another complication ensuing from longstanding diabetes. The purpose of this review is to concentrate on skeletal parameters and techniques readily available from DXA scanning, and their utility in routine clinical practice for predicting fracture risk. In addition to BMD, other applications and measures from DXA include trabecular bone score (TBS), skeletal geometry and DXA-based finite-element analysis, vertebral fracture assessment, and body composition. In type 1 diabetes (T1D), BMD and FRAX(R) (when secondary osteoporosis is included without BMD) only partially account for the excess risk of fracture in T1D. Consistent data exist to show that BMD and FRAX(R) can be used to stratify fracture risk in T2D, but do not account for the increased risk of fracture. However, several adjustments to the FRAX score can be made as proxies for T2D to inform the use of FRAX by primary care practitioners. Examples include using the rheumatoid arthritis input (as a proxy for T2D), lumbar spine TBS (to adjust FRAX probability) or an altered hip T-score (lowered by 0.5 units). These adjustments can improve fracture risk prediction in T2D and help to avoid systematically underestimating the risk of osteoporosis-related fractures in those with diabetes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Australia | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 102 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 11 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 17% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Engineering | 6 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 8% |
| Unknown | 34 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 December 2016.
All research outputs
#1,132,303
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#41
of 1,761 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,707
of 336,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#2
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,761 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.