help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrine Reviews
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shea, B.
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shea, B.
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Hazardous Substances DB
*CALCIUM COMPOUNDS
*CALCIUM, ELEMENTAL
Medline Plus Health Information
*Dietary Supplements
*Osteoporosis
Endocrine Reviews 23 (4): 552-559
Copyright © 2002 by The Endocrine Society

VII. Meta-Analysis of Calcium Supplementation for the Prevention of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Beverley Shea, George Wells, Ann Cranney, Nicole Zytaruk, Vivian Robinson, Lauren Griffith, Zulma Ortiz, Joan Peterson, Jonathan Adachi, Peter Tugwell and Gordon Guyatt , the Osteoporosis Methodology Group, and the Osteoporosis Research Advisory Group


   A. Abstract
Top
 A. Abstract
B. Introduction
 C. Methods
 D. Results
 E. Discussion
 References
 
Objective: To summarize controlled trials examining the effect of calcium on bone density and fractures in postmenopausal women.

Data Source: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE up to 1998 and the Cochrane Controlled Register up to 2000, and we examined citations of relevant articles and proceedings of international meetings. We contacted osteoporosis investigators to identify additional studies, and primary authors for unpublished data.

Study Selection: We included 15 trials (1806 patients) that randomized postmenopausal women to calcium supplementation or usual calcium intake in the diet and reported bone mineral density of the total body, vertebral spine, hip, or forearm, or recorded the number of fractures, and followed patients for at least 1 yr.

Data Extraction: For each trial, three independent reviewers assessed the methodological quality and extracted data.

Data Synthesis: We found calcium to be more effective than placebo in reducing rates of bone loss after two or more years of treatment. The pooled difference in percentage change from baseline was 2.05% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24–3.86] for total body bone density, 1.66% (95% CI 0.92–2.39) for the lumbar spine, 1.64% (95% CI 0.70–2.57) for the hip, and 1.91% (95% CI 0.33–3.50) for the distal radius. The relative risk (RR) of fractures of the vertebrae was 0.77, with a wide CI (95% CI 0.54–1.09); the RR for nonvertebral fractures was 0.86 (95% CI 0.43–1.72).

Conclusions: Calcium supplementation alone has a small positive effect on bone density. The data show a trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures, but do not meaningfully address the possible effect of calcium on reducing the incidence of nonvertebral fractures.


   B. Introduction
Top
 A. Abstract
 B. Introduction
C. Methods
 D. Results
 E. Discussion
 References
 
OF ALL THE available preventive strategies for osteoporotic fractures, calcium is the simplest and least expensive. An essential nutrient with minimal toxicity, calcium supplementation is nevertheless not without controversy (1, 2). The Food and Drug Administration in the United States has permitted a bone health claim for calcium-rich foods, and the NIH in its Consensus Development Process approved a statement that high calcium intake reduces the risk of osteoporosis.

Cumming et al. (3) reviewed both observational and controlled clinical trials relating calcium intake to fracture incidence. Observational studies often provide biased estimates, and the authors did not find conclusive evidence of benefit from the controlled trials alone. Furthermore, they did not examine the effect of calcium supplementation on bone mineral density (3). Mackerras and Lumley (4) conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of increasing calcium ingestion on bone density in women, but their analysis omitted 4 of the 15 available studies, failed to contact authors to obtain missing data and clarify data report accuracy, and did not address the effect on fractures. We have therefore conducted a systematic review to quantify the effect of calcium supplementation on postmenopausal bone loss and fractures.

This section is the seventh in our series presenting RCT evidence regarding major antiosteoporotic therapy. In Section I, we presented the rationale for the series and described in detail the methods common to each systematic review. In this analysis, we will briefly summarize our methods and consider the effect of calcium supplementation alone. We deal with studies that examined the effects of calcium and vitamin D given together in the next section.


   C. Methods
Top
 A. Abstract
 B. Introduction
 C. Methods
D. Results
 E. Discussion
 References
 
1. Inclusion criteria.
We developed and published an a priori protocol according to the methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration (5). Studies satisfied the following inclusion criteria, as indicated in Section I, as well as the following: 1) RCTs of calcium supplementation in women older than 45 yr with absence of menses for a minimum of 6 months; 2) treatment with doses of calcium at least 400 mg/d. We also included RCTs in which both active and control groups received a maintenance dose of vitamin D, providing the loading dose was no more than 300,000 IU, and the maintenance dose was no more than 400 IU/d (6, 7).

2. Study search and selection.
To identify RCTs of calcium supplementation, we evaluated MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1966 to April 1998 including Current Contents of the 6 months before April 1998, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register up to 2000 (8, 9). We also conducted hand searches of bibliographic reference. We asked content experts to identify published or unpublished relevant RCTs we had overlooked. Two reviewers (J.P., B.S.) examined each title generated from the search and identified potentially eligible articles for which we obtained the abstracts. For abstracts consistent with study eligibility, we obtained the full article text.

3. Methodological quality.
Three reviewers (J.P., N.Z., B.S.) rated the methodological quality of each eligible study with respect to whether patients, caregivers, and those measuring outcome are blind to allocation, and the extent of loss to follow-up.

4. Reliability of judgements.
We used more than one reviewer in the selection of studies, the assessment of methodological quality, and the extraction of data. For all aspects of the review in which raters made duplicate judgements, they resolved disagreements by consensus. The interobserver agreement measured for the quality assessment with {kappa} (10) for blind to allocation 0.85, and for follow-up was 0.49.

5. A priori hypotheses regarding heterogeneity.
To explore reasons for large differences in results between studies (heterogeneity) we developed a priori hypotheses relating to the methodological quality of the study, the study population, and the dose and type of calcium administered. Specifically, we compared results in RCTs grouped in the following ways: 1) different methodological quality (randomization concealed or unconcealed; blinded or unblinded; extent of loss to follow-up); 2) different doses of calcium supplementation (above and below 800 mg/d, a value that approximates the median dose of calcium supplementation in the eligible trials); 3) type of calcium formulation (a manuscript reviewer suggested this hypothesis); 4) early postmenopausal women (<=5 yr) and late postmenopausal women (5 yr); 5) different levels of baseline calcium intake (less than or greater than 750 mg, a value that approximates the median baseline intake in the eligible trials); and 6) for forearm and hip bone density, subregion of measurement.

6. Statistical analysis.
For each bone density site (lumbar spine, total body, combined hip, and combined forearm), we calculated the weighted mean difference in bone density between treatment and control groups using the percentage change from baseline in the treatment and placebo groups and the associated SD values. We constructed regression models in which the independent variables were year and dose, and the dependent variable the effect size, and we used this regression to determine the years across which pooling was appropriate. To assess whether the magnitude of heterogeneity (differences in apparent treatment effect across studies) was greater than one might expect by chance, we conducted a test based on the {chi}2 distribution with N-1 degrees of freedom, where N is the number of studies (11).

For each fracture analysis, we calculated a risk ratio (a RR) using methods described by Fleiss (11). We derived risk ratios by constructing two-by-two tables for vertebral and nonvertebral fractures. We tested for heterogeneity using a {chi}2 procedure (12).

We tested whether our a priori hypotheses could explain variability in the magnitude of treatment effects across studies using a procedure described by Hedges and Olkin (12). To test for publication bias, we constructed plots of the relationship between sample size and the magnitude of the treatment effect.


   D. Results
Top
 A. Abstract
 B. Introduction
 C. Methods
 D. Results
E. Discussion
 References
 
1. Search results.
Figure 1Go presents the results of our search for eligible studies. Electronic and hand searching uncovered a total of 66 published papers that addressed the relationship between calcium intake and bone mineral density. Twenty-three described RCTs (6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33), of which 7 were excluded for various reasons including combination with vitamin D (29, 33), male participants (31), trial duration less then 1 yr (30, 32), or measurement of bone density exclusively at the ultra-distal forearm site (27, 28).



View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. Results of search for eligible studies.

 
Of the 16 authors of eligible studies whom we contacted for missing data, 13 provided additional data (6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23). We had to exclude one study due to lack of the data regarding error terms for the analysis (24), and we were unable to contact one investigator (26), although the study provided sufficient data for inclusion. Thus, 15 RCTs both fulfilled our eligibility criteria and provided useful data for pooling (6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26). Of the 13 investigators who did provide additional data, 11 were able to provide us with all the information we sought (6, 7, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23), whereas the other 2 provided us with some of the information we requested (13, 21).

2. Study characteristics.
The 15 RCTs included 1806 patients, of whom 953 patients received calcium supplementation. Table 1Go summarizes the characteristics of these studies. Of the 15 studies, 13 investigators confirmed that the randomization was concealed (6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23); 13 investigators confirmed that patients, caregivers, and those measuring outcome were blind to allocation (6, 7, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23). None of the trials had between 1% and less than 5% loss to follow-up, 13 trials had a loss to follow-up between 5% and 20%, and 2 trials lost more that 20% of their patients. We were unable to obtain the methodology information for two of the trials (25, 26).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Study characteristics from the calcium trials

 
3. Fractures.
Five studies including 576 women reported fractures as an outcome (6, 16, 20, 23, 25). All five trials investigated the influence of calcium supplementation on vertebral fractures. The pooled RR indicated a nonsignificant trend toward reduction in vertebral fractures in the calcium group (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.54–1.09, P = 0.14; Fig. 2Go). The two trials (6, 23) that reported nonvertebral fractures had very few events, and the CI on the pooled estimate is therefore very wide (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.43–1.72, P = 0.66). For both vertebral and nonvertebral fractures, the effect of calcium was consistent across trials (heterogeneity P = 0.40, 0.54, respectively; Table 2Go). The funnel plots provided no evidence of publication bias.



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. RR of vertebral fracture after treatment with calcium.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Weighted RR of fracture After treatment with calcium

 
4. Bone mineral density.
Table 3Go summarizes the impact of calcium on bone mineral density at the four sites we examined. Our initial analyses suggested that we could pool across years in all instances but one, the lumbar spine. Here, the estimated effect of calcium for yr 3 and 4 was actually less than for yr 1 and 2 (Table 3Go). For all sites but lumbar spine at 2 yr of follow-up (Fig. 3Go), calcium showed an effect of between 1.6 and just over 2% in bone density.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Weighted mean difference of bone density after treatment with calcium

 


View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Weighted mean difference for lumbar spine after treatment with calcium at 2 yr.

 
At all sites, we found considerable variability in estimates of effect across trials reflected in statistically significant tests of heterogeneity. Funnel plots provided no persuasive evidence of publication bias.

Our search for explanations of this heterogeneity proved largely fruitless (Table 4Go). For the total body measurement, we observed a statistically significantly greater effect in primary than secondary studies, and with smaller doses of calcium than larger doses. For lumbar spine at 2 yr, the effect was in the opposite direction, suggesting a larger impact of higher doses.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Heterogeneity of difference of bone mineral density

 
We did find an apparently greater effect of calcium carbonate than calcium citrate on total body bone density and on the hip site (Table 5Go). However, the trend for the lumbar spine measurements was in the opposite direction (larger effects with calcium citrate). Moreover, the total body and hip site analyses were based on only a single RCT using calcium citrate and two RCTs using calcium carbonate. Thus, any inferences based on this analysis are extremely weak. No other subgroup analysis showed statistically significant results.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 5. Difference of bone mineral density by calcium type

 

   E. Discussion
Top
 A. Abstract
 B. Introduction
 C. Methods
 D. Results
 E. Discussion
References
 
This systematic review is restricted to calcium supplementation with minimal vitamin D. Large studies of vitamin D have shown conflicting results (29, 33). We summarize the data from all randomized trials of vitamin D in Section VIII.

Our data suggest a relatively small, but possibly important, effect of calcium supplementation on bone density in postmenopausal women. The inference that calcium increases bone density is strengthened by the consistency of the finding across four sites of measurement (Table 3Go). The inference is, however, weakened by the large loss to follow-up in most studies (Table 1Go) and by the unexplained heterogeneity of results across studies (Tables 3Go and 4Go).

To establish the effect of calcium supplementation on fractures would require large, relatively long trials measuring fracture incidence. We found only five RCTs that measured fracture rate. The point estimate from the meta-analysis of these five studies suggested a potentially important reduction in vertebral fractures (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.54–1.09, P = 0.14, RR 0.77), and a smaller reduction in risk of nonvertebral fractures (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.43–1.72, P = 0.66). Thus, even for vertebral fractures, a true underlying substantial reduction in the RR of fractures (46%) or small increase in the RR of fractures (10%) both remain plausible.

The estimates provided by our analysis are limited by problems inherent in the original studies, including a lack of uniformity in outcome measures. In 1996, during the Conference on Outcome Measures in Rheumatology Clinical Trials (OMERACT 3), participants agreed on a potential core set of outcome measures for osteoporosis (34). A core set will permit the comparison of data across all trials to perform accurate meta-analyses. The primary outcomes will be the number of women experiencing new nonvertebral and vertebral fractures (clinical and radiographic), bone mineral density, and toxicity (measured by withdrawals and side effects), as recommended by the OMERACT group in 1997 (34).

As well as considering these issues, future investigations should take care with the selection of study patients, the dose and formulation of calcium administration, and the measures of outcome. When they select study populations, investigators should also consider factors that may influence the effectiveness of calcium supplementation, including age, years since menopause, dietary calcium intake, and vitamin D status, in selecting study populations. Site of bone density measurement, type and precision of the instruments, and definition of fracture may also influence the apparent magnitude of treatment effects.

In summary, we found small but statistically significant and potentially important effects of calcium supplementation in bone loss over a 2-yr period. Ensuring adequate calcium intake may be important for a variety of reasons, including its role as part of an intervention that includes another agent such as vitamin D or bisphosphonates. The magnitude of reduction in fracture risk with calcium supplementation alone remains an open question.


   Acknowledgments
 
The authors thank Dr. Graeme Jones for reviewing earlier versions of this paper and Candyce Hamel for her administrative support, and also express thanks to the authors who were instrumental in obtaining the additional data: J. F. Aloia, E. Flaster, M. Feuerman, T. Chevally, R. Rizzoli, B. Dawson-Hughes, E. Khral, B. Lamke, R. Prince, R. Recker, I. Reid, B. L. Riggs, K. Egan, B. J Riis, E. Smith, L. Strause, M. Andon of Procter & Gamble, and M. E. Nelson. We thank Dr. A. J. Yates for helpful comments on the manuscript. This work was supported in part by grants from Merck and Procter & Gamble.


   Footnotes
 
Abbreviations: CI, Confidence interval; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RR, relative risk.


   References
Top
 A. Abstract
 B. Introduction
 C. Methods
 D. Results
 E. Discussion
 References
 

  1. Kanis JA, Passmore R 1989 Calcium supplementation of the diet: not justified by present evidence. BMJ 298:137–140
  2. Nordin BEC, Heaney RP 1990 Calcium supplementation of the diet: justified by present evidence. BMJ 300:1056–1060
  3. Cumming R, Cummings S, Nevitt M, Scott J, Ensrud K, Vogt T, Fox K 1997 Calcium intake and fracture risk: results from the study of osteoporotic fractures. Am J Epidemiol 145:927–935
  4. Mackerras D, Lumley T 1997 First and second-year effects in trials of calcium supplementation of the loss of bone density in postmenopausal women. Bone 21:527–533[Medline]
  5. Mulrow CD, Oxman AD, eds. 1994 Cochrane Collaboration Handbook. In: The Cochrane Library (database on disk and CD-ROM). The Cochrane Collaboration. Oxford: Update Software; issue 4
  6. Chevalley T, Rizzoli R, Nydegger V, Slosman D, Rapin C-H, Michel J-P, Vasey H, Bonjour J-P 1994 Effects on calcium supplements on femoral bone mineral density and vertebral fracture rate in vitamin-D-replete elderly patients. Osteoporosis Int 4:245–252[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Aloia JA, Vaswani A, Yeh JK, Ross PL, Flaster E, Dilmanian FA 1994 Calcium supplementation with and without hormone replacement therapy to prevent postmenopausal bone loss. Ann Intern Med 120:98–103
  8. Shea B, Cranney A, Tugwell P, Welch V, Ortiz Z, Adachi R, Peterson J, Wells G 1999 Calcium for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women (protocol for a Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library Issue 2. Oxford: Update Software
  9. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C 1994 Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 309:1286–1291[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Landis JR, Koch GG 1977 The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174[CrossRef][Medline]
  11. Fleiss JL 1993 The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res 2:121–145[Medline]
  12. Hedges LV, Olkin I 1985 Statistical methods for meta-analysis. San Diego: Academic Press; 159–65
  13. Riis B, Thomsen K, Christiansen C 1987 Does calcium supplementation prevent postmenopausal bone loss? A double-blind, controlled clinical study. N Engl J Med 316:173–177[Abstract]
  14. Strause L, Saltman P, Smith K, Bracker M, Andon M 1994 Spinal bone loss in postmenopausal women supplemented with calcium and trace minerals. J Nutr 124:1060–1064
  15. Dawson-Hughes B, Dallai GE, Krall EA, Sadowski L, Sahyoun N, Tannenbuam S 1990 A controlled trial of the effects of calcium supplementation on bone density in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 323:878–883[Abstract]
  16. Reid IR, Ames RW, Evans MC, Gamble GD, Sharpe SJ 1993 Effect of calcium supplementation on bone loss in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 328:460–464[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Smith EL, Gilligan C, Smith PE, Sempos CT 1989 Calcium supplementation and bone loss in middle-aged women 1–3. Am Soc Clin Nutr 50:833–842
  18. Lamke B, Sjoberg H-E, Sylven M 1978 Bone mineral content in women with Colles’ fracture: effect of calcium supplementation. Acta Orthop Scand 49:143–146[Medline]
  19. Prince R, Devine A, Dick I, Criddle A, D Kerr, Kent N, Price R, Randell A 1995 The effects of calcium supplementation (milk powder or tablets) and exercise on bone density in postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 10:1068–1075[Medline]
  20. Recker R, Hinders S, Davies M, Heaney R, Stegman MR, Lappe J, Kimmel DB 1996 Correcting calcium nutritional deficiency prevents spine fractures in elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 11:1961–1966[Medline]
  21. Nelson ME, Fisher EC, Dilmanian FA, Dallal GE, Evans WJ 1991 A 1 year walking program and increased dietary calcium in postmenopausal women: effects on bone. Am Soc Clin Nutr 53:1304–1311
  22. Prince RL, Smith M, Dick IM, Price RI, Webb PG, Henderson K, Harris MM 1991 Prevention of postmenopausal osteoporosis: A comparative study of exercise, calcium supplementation, and hormone-replacement therapy. N Engl J Med 325:1189–1195[Abstract]
  23. Riggs BL, O’Fallon MW, Muhs J, O’Connor MK, Kumar R, Melton III JL 1998 Long term effects of calcium supplementation on serum parathyroid hormone levels, bone turnover, and bone loss in elderly women. J Bone Miner Res 13:168–174[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Smith EL, Reddan W, Smith PE 1981 Physical activity and calcium modalities for bone mineral increase in aged women. Med Sci Sports Exerc 13:60–64[Medline]
  25. Hansson T, Roos B 1987 The effect of fluoride and calcium on spinal bone mineral content: a controlled, prospective (3 years) study. Calcif Tissue Int 40:315–317[Medline]
  26. Elders PJ, Netelenbos JC, Lips P, van Ginkel FC, Khoe E, Leeuwenkamp OR, Hackeng WH, van der Stelt PF 1991 Calcium supplementation reduces vertebral bone loss in perimenopausal women: a controlled trial in 248 women between 46 and 55 years of age. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 73:533–540[Abstract]
  27. Recker R, Saville PD, Heaney RP 1977 Effect of estrogen and calcium carbonate on bone loss in postmenopausal women. Ann Intern Med 87:649–652
  28. Recker R, Heaney RP 1985 The effect of milk supplements on calcium metabolism, bone metabolism and calcium balance. Am J Clin Nutr 41: 254–63
  29. Chapuy MC, Arlot ME, Duboeuf F, Brun J, Crouzet B, Arnaud S, Delmas D, Meunier PJ 1992 Vitamin D3 and calcium to prevent hip fractures in elderly women. N Engl J Med 327:1637–1642[Abstract]
  30. Polley KJ, Nordin BEC, Baghurst PA, Walkers CJ, Chatterton BE 1987 Effect of calcium supplementation on forearm bone mineral content in postmenopausal women: a prospective, sequential controlled trial. J Nutr 117:1929–1935
  31. Orwoll ES, Oviatt SK, McClung MR, Deftos LJ, Sexton G 1990 The rate of bone mineral loss in normal men and the effects of calcium and cholecalciferol supplementation. Ann Intern Med 112:29–34
  32. Lau EMC, Woo J, Leung PC, Swaminathan R, Leung D 1992 The effects of calcium supplementation and exercise on bone density in elderly Chinese women. Osteoporosis Int 2:168–173[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Dawson-Hughes B, Harris SS, Krall EA, Dallal GE 1997 Effect of calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone density in men and women 65 years of age or older. N Engl J Med 337:670–676[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Cranney A, Tugwell P, Cummings S, Sambrook P, Adachi J, Silman A, Gillespie W, Felson D, Shea B, Wells G 1997 Osteoporosis clinical trials endpoints: candidate variable and clinimetric properties. J Rheumatol 24:1222–1229[Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
A.E. Kearns and D.F. Kallmes
Osteoporosis Primer for the Vertebroplasty Practitioner: Expanding the Focus Beyond Needles and Cement
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., November 1, 2008; 29(10): 1816 - 1822.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
A. Qaseem, V. Snow, P. Shekelle, R. Hopkins Jr., M. A. Forciea, D. K. Owens, and for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee
Pharmacologic Treatment of Low Bone Density or Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures: A Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians
Ann Intern Med, September 16, 2008; 149(6): 404 - 415.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
R. P. Heaney
Nutrients, Endpoints, and the Problem of Proof
J. Nutr., September 1, 2008; 138(9): 1591 - 1595.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
J. R. Hunt, C. D. Hunt, C. A. Zito, J. P. Idso, and L. K. Johnson
Calcium Requirements of Growing Rats Based on Bone Mass, Structure, or Biomechanical Strength Are Similar
J. Nutr., August 1, 2008; 138(8): 1462 - 1468.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
K. Zhu, A. Devine, I. M. Dick, S. G. Wilson, and R. L. Prince
Effects of Calcium and Vitamin D Supplementation on Hip Bone Mineral Density and Calcium-Related Analytes in Elderly Ambulatory Australian Women: A Five-Year Randomized Controlled Trial
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2008; 93(3): 743 - 749.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ANN INTERN MEDHome page
C. MacLean, S. Newberry, M. Maglione, M. McMahon, V. Ranganath, M. Suttorp, W. Mojica, M. Timmer, A. Alexander, M. McNamara, et al.
Systematic Review: Comparative Effectiveness of Treatments to Prevent Fractures in Men and Women with Low Bone Density or Osteoporosis
Ann Intern Med, February 5, 2008; 148(3): 197 - 213.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
J. M Hodgson, A. Devine, V. Burke, I. M Dick, and R. L Prince
Chocolate consumption and bone density in older women
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, January 1, 2008; 87(1): 175 - 180.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nutr Clin PractHome page
D. A. Straub
Calcium Supplementation in Clinical Practice: A Review of Forms, Doses, and Indications
Nutr Clin Pract, June 1, 2007; 22(3): 286 - 296.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Endocr. Rev.Home page
M. Schumacher, R. Guennoun, A. Ghoumari, C. Massaad, F. Robert, M. El-Etr, Y. Akwa, K. Rajkowski, and E.-E. Baulieu
Novel Perspectives for Progesterone in Hormone Replacement Therapy, with Special Reference to the Nervous System
Endocr. Rev., June 1, 2007; 28(4): 387 - 439.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
S. Khosla and L. J. Melton III
Osteopenia
N. Engl. J. Med., May 31, 2007; 356(22): 2293 - 2300.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
J. Ma, R. A Johns, and R. S Stafford
Americans are not meeting current calcium recommendations
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, May 1, 2007; 85(5): 1361 - 1366.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
S. Boonen, P. Lips, R. Bouillon, H. A. Bischoff-Ferrari, D. Vanderschueren, and P. Haentjens
Need for Additional Calcium to Reduce the Risk of Hip Fracture with Vitamin D Supplementation: Evidence from a Comparative Metaanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., April 1, 2007; 92(4): 1415 - 1423.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
R. P Heaney
Bone health
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, January 1, 2007; 85(1): 300S - 303S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Integr Cancer TherHome page
M. F. McCarty and K. I. Block
Toward a core nutraceutical program for cancer management.
Integr Cancer Ther, June 1, 2006; 5(2): 150 - 171.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Arch Intern MedHome page
R. L. Prince, A. Devine, S. S. Dhaliwal, and I. M. Dick
Effects of Calcium Supplementation on Clinical Fracture and Bone Structure: Results of a 5-Year, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial in Elderly Women.
Arch Intern Med, April 24, 2006; 166(8): 869 - 875.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
R. D. Jackson, A. Z. LaCroix, M. Gass, R. B. Wallace, J. Robbins, C. E. Lewis, T. Bassford, S. A.A. Beresford, H. R. Black, P. Blanchette, et al.
Calcium plus Vitamin D Supplementation and the Risk of Fractures
N. Engl. J. Med., February 16, 2006; 354(7): 669 - 683.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
J. S. Finkelstein
Calcium plus Vitamin D for Postmenopausal Women -- Bone Appetit?
N. Engl. J. Med., February 16, 2006; 354(7): 750 - 752.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
P. Houillier, M. Froissart, G. Maruani, and A. Blanchard
What serum calcium can tell us and what it can't
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 1, 2006; 21(1): 29 - 32.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 QJMHome page
M. Gugatschka, H. Dobnig, A. Fahrleitner-Pammer, P. Pietschmann, S. Kudlacek, A. Strele, and B. Obermayer-Pietsch
Molecularly-defined lactose malabsorption, milk consumption and anthropometric differences in adult males
QJM, December 1, 2005; 98(12): 857 - 863.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 NEJMHome page
C. J. Rosen
Postmenopausal Osteoporosis
N. Engl. J. Med., August 11, 2005; 353(6): 595 - 603.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
I. R. Reid, A. Horne, B. Mason, R. Ames, U. Bava, and G. D. Gamble
Effects of Calcium Supplementation on Body Weight and Blood Pressure in Normal Older Women: A Randomized Controlled Trial
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2005; 90(7): 3824 - 3829.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 QJMHome page
D.J. Hosking, P. Geusens, and R. Rizzoli
Osteoporosis therapy: an example of putting evidence-based medicine into clinical practice
QJM, June 1, 2005; 98(6): 403 - 413.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Clin. Nutr.Home page
J. W Nieves
Osteoporosis: the role of micronutrients
Am. J. Clinical Nutrition, May 1, 2005; 81(5): 1232S - 1239S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
J. Maurer, M. M. Harris, V. A. Stanford, T. G. Lohman, E. Cussler, S. B. Going, and L. B. Houtkooper
Dietary Iron Positively Influences Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women on Hormone Replacement Therapy
J. Nutr., April 1, 2005; 135(4): 863 - 869.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
S. C. Ho, Y.-M. Chen, J. L. F. Woo, and S. S. H. Lam
High Habitual Calcium Intake Attenuates Bone Loss in Early Postmenopausal Chinese Women: An 18-Month Follow-Up Study
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., May 1, 2004; 89(5): 2166 - 2170.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shea, B.
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shea, B.
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Hazardous Substances DB
*CALCIUM COMPOUNDS
*CALCIUM, ELEMENTAL
Medline Plus Health Information
*Dietary Supplements
*Osteoporosis

HOME