ArticleGeroScience2025
Automated abdominal aortic calcification scoring from vertebral fracture assessment images and fall-associated hospitalisations: the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density Registry.
Article in GeroScience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multimodal imaging of acquired aortic diseases: clinical efficacy, comparative analysis, and future perspectives.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2026Review
- Automated abdominal aortic calcification and trabecular bone score independently predict incident fracture during routine osteoporosis screening.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal aortic calcification (AAC), a subclinical measure of cardiovascular disease (CVD) that can be assessed on vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) images during osteoporosis screening, is reported to be a falls risk factor. A limitation to incorporating AAC clinically is that its scoring requires trained experts and is time-consuming. We examined if our machine learning (ML) algorithm for AAC (ML-AAC24) is associated with a higher fall-associated hospitalisation risk in the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Registry. A total of 8565 individuals (94.0% female, age 75.7 ± 6.8 years) who had a BMD and VFA image from DXA between February 2010 and December 2017 were included. ML-AAC24 was categorised based on established categories (ML-AAC24 = low < 2; moderate 2 to < 6; high ≥ 6). Cox proportional hazards models assessed the relationship between ML-AAC24 categories and incident fall-associated hospitalisations obtained from linked health records (mean ± SD follow-up, 3.9 ± 2.2 years). Individuals with moderate (9.6%) and high ML-AAC24 (11.7%) had a greater proportion of fall-associated hospitalisations, compared to those with low ML-AAC24 (6.0%). In age and sex-adjusted models, compared to low ML-AAC24, moderate (HR 1.49, 95% CI 1.24-1.79) and high ML-AAC24 (HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.56-2.28) were associated with greater hazards for a fall-associated hospitalisation. Results were comparable (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.13-1.65 and HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.31-1.95, respectively) after multivariable adjustment, including prior falls and CVD, as well as medication use. Integrating ML-AAC24 into bone density machine software to identify high risk individuals would opportunistically provide important information on fall and cardiovascular disease risk to clinicians for evaluation and intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.