| Title |
Prevalence and Risk Factors of Low Bone Mineral Density in Juvenile Onset Ankylosing Spondylitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Calcified Tissue International, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00223-014-9867-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jun Bao, Yi Chen, Yi-Xiao Bao |
| Abstract |
The objective of this study is to assess the prevalence and risk in patients with juvenile onset ankylosing spondylitis (JoAS) complicated with low bone mineral density (BMD). A total of 112 children and adolescents with JoAS were enrolled in the study. Bone mass was measured from the lumbar spine and the left proximal femur using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. According to the 2007 International Society of Clinical Densitometry definitions, a Z score of less than -2 was termed as "low BMD." Stepwise regression analysis was used to investigate associations between low BMD and disease-related factors including gender, age, weight, height, body mass index, disease duration, HLA-B27 antigen, grades of sacroiliitis, Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), Bath AS Functional Index (BASFI), patient global assessment (PGA), spine pain, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), and C-reactive protein (CRP). Low BMD was found in 18 (16.1 %) cases in at least one of the two measured regions. Lumbar spine BMD had negative correlations with BASDAI, BASFI, spine pain, ESR, and CRP (P < 0.05). Hip BMD significantly negatively correlated with BASDAI and PGA (P < 0.05). In conclusion, patients with JoAS are likely to develop low BMD, which may be related to high disease activity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 24% |
| Unknown | 7 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 32% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 11 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 31 July 2014.
All research outputs
#18,375,478
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Calcified Tissue International
#1,470
of 1,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,058
of 226,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Calcified Tissue International
#17
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,756 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.