ArticleScientific reports2025
Psychological resilience and clinical depression on bone loss and fracture.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effects of psychological resilience and depressive symptoms on bone health have not been well-studied. This work aimed to evaluate the association between psychological resilience and depressive symptoms on bone mineral density (BMD) and osteoporotic fracture in community-dwelling adults in Korea. Data from the Chungju Metabolic Disease Cohort were used. Between May 2007 and March 2011, 4029 participants aged 40 years or older underwent a baseline examination, and approximately four years later, they underwent a second examination. BMD was measured, and resilience and depression scales were completed. Participants in the lowest resilience group had lower BMD Z-scores at the femoral neck (0.04 ± 0.53 vs. 0.22 ± 0.950, p < 0.001) and the total hip (0.17 ± 0.98 vs. 0.34 ± 0.92, p < 0.001) compared to those in the highest resilience group. Individuals with clinical depression also had lower BMD Z-scores than those without it. However, resilience status was not associated with the prevalence of osteoporosis at follow-up or incident fracture. In contrast, the odds of osteoporosis were 1.39 (95% CI 1.12-1.71) in women with clinical depression even after adjusting for covariates. In men, clinical depression was not associated with the odds of osteoporosis. Among non-osteoporotic participants, subjects with clinical depression had a 1.40-fold (95% CI 1.07-1.92) higher fracture incidence than those without depression. In this study, low resilience did not appear to negatively affect the prevalence of osteoporosis at follow-up or fracture. Among non-osteoporotic participants, depressive individuals have a potentially increased risk of fracture compared with those without clinical depression.
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.