Top

Osteoporosis International

Published in:

01-10-2006 | Review

Quality and performance measures in bone densitometry

Part 2: Fracture risk

Authors: C. C. Glüer, Y. Lu, K. Engelke

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Issue 10/2006

Abstract

Introduction

This is part 2 of a core chapter of the forthcoming Report on Bone Densitometry commissioned by the International Commission on Radiation Units (ICRU). It is written with the aim to review definitions of quantities and units used in bone densitometry research and to describe parameters and methods that can be used to compare and standardize densitometric equipment and measurements. Part 2 of this chapter contains the section on fracture risk.

Performance measures in the assessment of fracture risk

Building on concepts of risk assessment, including risk ratios and odds ratios, we review statistical concepts commonly used in cross-sectional and prospective fracture studies. Performance measures are defined that allow a comparison of the ability of densitometry techniques to assess fracture risk.

Discussion

The methods of discriminant analysis, logistic regression, Poisson regression models, and the Cox proportional hazard model are presented and compared. In addition, statistical concepts to characterize risk for the individual patient are reviewed.

Sheskin DJ (1997) Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic, New York

Metz CE, Goodenough DJ, Rossmann K (1973) Evaluation of receiver operating characteristic curve data in terms of information theory, with applications in radiography. Radiology 109:297–303PubMed

Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH (1998) Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 17:1033–1053PubMedCrossRef

Johnson RA, Wichern DW (1988) Applied multivariate statistical analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

Su JQ, Liu JS (1993) Linear combinations of multiple diagnostic markers. J Am Stat Assoc 88:1350–1355CrossRef

Lachenbruch PA, Mickey MA (1968) Estimation of error rates in discriminant analysis. Technometrics 10:1–10CrossRef

Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Morgenstern H (1982) Epidemiologic research: principles and quantitative methods. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York

Zhang J, Yu KF (1998) What’s the relative risk? A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA 280:1690–1691

10.

McNutt LA, Wu C, Xue X, Hafner JP (2003) Estimating the relative risk in cohort studies and clinical trials of common outcomes. Am J Epidemiol 157:940–943PubMedCrossRef

11.

Davison A, Hinckley D (1997) Bootstrap methods and their applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

12.

Hui SL, Slemenda CW, Carey MA, Johnston CC Jr (1995) Choosing between predictors of fractures. J Bone Miner Res 10: 1816–1822PubMedCrossRef

13.

Lunt M, O’Neill TW, Felsenberg D et al (2003) Characteristics of a prevalent vertebral deformity predict subsequent vertebral fracture: results from the European Prospective Osteoporosis Study (EPOS). Bone 33:505–513PubMedCrossRef

14.

Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A et al (2001) Ten-year probabilities of osteoporotic fractures according to BMD and diagnostic thresholds. Osteoporos Int 12:989–995

15.

Hochberg MC, Greenspan S, Wasnich RD et al (2002) Changes in bone density and turnover explain the reductions in incidence of nonvertebral fractures that occur during treatment with antiresorptive agents. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 87:1586–1592PubMedCrossRef

16.

Ensrud KE, Thompson DE, Cauley JA et al (2000) Prevalent vertebral deformities predict mortality and hospitalization in older women with low bone mass. Fracture intervention trial research group. J Am Geriatr Soc 48:241–249PubMed

17.

Vermunt J (1997) Log-linear models for event histories. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

18.

Kalbfleisch JD, Prentice RL (1980) The statistical analysis of failure time data. Wiley, New York

19.

Heagerty PJ, Lumley T, Pepe MS (2000) Time-dependent ROC curves for censored survival data and a diagnostic marker. Biometrics 56:337–344PubMedCrossRef

20.

Collet D (1994) Modelling survival data in medical research. Chapman and Hall, London

21.

Callas PW, Pastides H, Hosmer DW (1998) Empirical comparisons of proportional hazards, Poisson, and logistic regression modeling of occupational cohort data. Am J Ind Med 33:33–47

22.

D’Agostino RB, Lee ML, Belanger AJ et al (1990) Relation of pooled logistic regression to time dependent Cox regression analysis: the Framingham Heart Study. Stat Med 9:1501–1515PubMedCrossRef

23.

Sun J (1997) Regression analysis of interval-censored failure time data. Stat Med 16:497–504PubMedCrossRef

24.

Austin PC, Tu JV (2004) Automated variable selection methods for logistic regression produced unstable models for predicting acute myocardial infarction mortality. J Clin Epidemiol 57:1138–1146PubMedCrossRef

25.

De Laet CE, Van Hout BA, Burger H et al (1998) Hip fracture prediction in elderly men and women: validation in the Rotterdam study. J Bone Miner Res 13:1587–1593PubMedCrossRef

26.

Cummings SR, Black DM, Thompson DE et al (1998) Effect of alendronate on risk of fracture in women with low bone density but without vertebral fractures: results from the Fracture Intervention Trial. JAMA 280:2077–2082

Title: Quality and performance measures in bone densitometry
Part 2: Fracture risk
Authors: C. C. Glüer
Y. Lu
K. Engelke
Publication date: 01-10-2006
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Osteoporosis International / Issue 10/2006
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-005-0038-1

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Quality and performance measures in bone densitometry

Part 2: Fracture risk

Abstract

Introduction

Performance measures in the assessment of fracture risk

Discussion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Performance measures in the assessment of fracture risk

Discussion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2006

Comparative study of axial and femoral bone mineral density and parameters of mandibular bone quality in patients receiving dental implants

Femoral neck cortical geometry measured with magnetic resonance imaging is associated with proximal femur strength

The 3D-based scaling index algorithm: a new structure measure to analyze trabecular bone architecture in high-resolution MR images in vivo

Osteocytes—martyrs for integrity of bone strength

Correlation of transmenopausal bone mass in healthy white women: a long-term longitudinal study

Teriparatide’s effects on quantitative ultrasound parameters and bone density in women with established osteoporosis