| Title |
Calcium and vitamin D fortified milk reduces bone turnover and improves bone density in postmenopausal women over 1 year
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Nutrition, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00394-017-1544-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marlena C. Kruger, Yoke Mun Chan, Lee Ting Lau, Chin Chin Lau, Yit Siew Chin, Barbara Kuhn-Sherlock, Joanne M. Todd, Linda M. Schollum |
| Abstract |
In Malaysia, hip fracture incidence is higher in Chinese women than other ethnic groups. This study compared the effects of a high-calcium vitamin D fortified milk with added FOS-inulin versus regular milk over 1 year on aspects of bone health in Chinese postmenopausal women in Malaysia. One-hundred and twenty-one women (mean age 59 (± 4) years) were randomized into two groups: control (n = 60; regular milk, 428 mg calcium per day) or intervention (n = 61; fortified milk at 1200 mg calcium, 96 mg magnesium, 2.4 mg zinc, 15 μg vitamin D and 4 g FOS-inulin per day). At baseline, weeks 12, 24, 36 and 52, parathyroid hormone (PTH), C-Telopeptide of Type I Collagen (CTx-1), Procollagen I Intact N-Terminal propeptide (PINP) and vitamin D levels were assessed. Bone density (BMD) was measured at baseline and week 52 using a GE Lunar iDXA. Body mass index, lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD did not differ between groups at baseline. Over 52 weeks, mean plasma 25 (OH) D3 levels increased to 74.8 nmol/L (intervention group) or remained at 63.1 nmol/L (control group) (p < 0.001 between groups). PTH levels increased in the control group (p = 0.001). The intervention resulted in a significant suppression of CTx-1 and PINP at p = 0.018 and p = 0.004. Femoral neck BMD remained stable in the intervention group but decreased significantly in the controls, with a borderline treatment effect (p = 0.07). Compared with regular milk, the fortified milk suppressed bone turnover markers and tended to increase femoral neck BMD. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 125 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 22 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 17% |
| Researcher | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 44 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 26 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 17 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 50 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 October 2019.
All research outputs
#14,956,881
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Nutrition
#1,670
of 2,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,797
of 323,064 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Nutrition
#32
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,405 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.2. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 323,064 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.