File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: An osteoporosis screening tool for Chinese men

TitleAn osteoporosis screening tool for Chinese men
Authors
Issue Date2005
PublisherSpringer U K. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.springer.com/medicine/orthopedics/journal/198
Citation
Osteoporosis International, 2005, v. 16 n. 7, p. 829-834 How to Cite?
AbstractSeveral osteoporosis risk instruments have been proposed to select women for bone densitometry, but no validated instruments are currently available for men. This study aims to address this deficiency by developing and validating a Male Osteoporosis Screening Tool (MOST) for Chinese men. Two thousand ambulatory men, aged 65 and above, were recruited from the general community in Hong Kong, and a cohort of 1,970 men with valid total hip and lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements was included in the current analysis. A 60% random sample was selected as the training sample for developing the screening tool, and the remaining 40% constituted the validation sample. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were used to identify the simplest combination of risk factors to be included in the screening tool for predicting osteoporosis at the femoral neck, total hip, or lumbar spine. Body weight and quantitative ultrasound index (QUI) were found to contribute significantly to the area under the ROC curve (AUC), yielding an AUC of 0.823 in the training sample. The resulting MOST had a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 46% when using a cutoff score of 3. MOST had an AUC of 0.839 in the validation sample. The risk of osteoporosis was 1% among those with MOST scores ≤ 2, but 72% among those with MOST scores >7. Using a cutoff of 3, the negative predictive value was 97.5% which suggests that the 42% with MOST scores ≤ 3 may be accurately screened out as being without osteoporosis, thus saving two fifths of our DXA resources. The positive predictive value was 72% when using a cutoff of 7, implying that MOST cannot replace DXA for case-finding purposes. Nevertheless, for resource allocation and patient satisfaction, it is prudent and economical to offer DXA screening first to the 6% with MOST scores >7. © International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2004.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/178276
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.445
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.460
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLynn, HSen_US
dc.contributor.authorLau, EMCen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, SYSen_US
dc.contributor.authorHong, AWLen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-12-19T09:44:58Z-
dc.date.available2012-12-19T09:44:58Z-
dc.date.issued2005en_US
dc.identifier.citationOsteoporosis International, 2005, v. 16 n. 7, p. 829-834en_US
dc.identifier.issn0937-941Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/178276-
dc.description.abstractSeveral osteoporosis risk instruments have been proposed to select women for bone densitometry, but no validated instruments are currently available for men. This study aims to address this deficiency by developing and validating a Male Osteoporosis Screening Tool (MOST) for Chinese men. Two thousand ambulatory men, aged 65 and above, were recruited from the general community in Hong Kong, and a cohort of 1,970 men with valid total hip and lumbar spine dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measurements was included in the current analysis. A 60% random sample was selected as the training sample for developing the screening tool, and the remaining 40% constituted the validation sample. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis were used to identify the simplest combination of risk factors to be included in the screening tool for predicting osteoporosis at the femoral neck, total hip, or lumbar spine. Body weight and quantitative ultrasound index (QUI) were found to contribute significantly to the area under the ROC curve (AUC), yielding an AUC of 0.823 in the training sample. The resulting MOST had a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 46% when using a cutoff score of 3. MOST had an AUC of 0.839 in the validation sample. The risk of osteoporosis was 1% among those with MOST scores ≤ 2, but 72% among those with MOST scores >7. Using a cutoff of 3, the negative predictive value was 97.5% which suggests that the 42% with MOST scores ≤ 3 may be accurately screened out as being without osteoporosis, thus saving two fifths of our DXA resources. The positive predictive value was 72% when using a cutoff of 7, implying that MOST cannot replace DXA for case-finding purposes. Nevertheless, for resource allocation and patient satisfaction, it is prudent and economical to offer DXA screening first to the 6% with MOST scores >7. © International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2004.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSpringer U K. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.springer.com/medicine/orthopedics/journal/198en_US
dc.relation.ispartofOsteoporosis Internationalen_US
dc.subject.meshAgeden_US
dc.subject.meshChinaen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Status Indicatorsen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshLogistic Modelsen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshMass Screening - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshOsteoporosis - Diagnosisen_US
dc.subject.meshSensitivity And Specificityen_US
dc.titleAn osteoporosis screening tool for Chinese menen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00198-004-1768-1en_US
dc.identifier.pmid15536535-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-21644438497en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-21644438497&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume16en_US
dc.identifier.issue7en_US
dc.identifier.spage829en_US
dc.identifier.epage834en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000230175800016-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats