Evidence Hub

Calcium Supplement Use Is Associated With Less Bone Mineral Density Loss, But Does Not Lessen the Risk of Bone Fracture Across the Menopause Transition: Data From the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation

Regan L. Bailey, Peishan Zou, T. Wallace, G. McCabe, B. Craig, Shinyoung Jun, J. Cauley, C. Weaver

JBMR Plus, 2019

1,490 participants · 25 citations

Abstract

Diet is a modifiable factor that is related to bone mass and risk for fractures; however, the use of calcium supplements for bone health is controversial, with little scientific agreement. The purpose of this analysis was to estimate the change in lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD and the risk of bone fracture by the use of calcium supplements among the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) participants. SWAN is a multicenter, multiethnic, community‐based longitudinal cohort designed to examine the health of women across the menopause transition (n = 1490; aged 42 to 52 years at baseline in 1996 to 1997 and followed annually until 2006 to 2008). A mixed‐effect model for repeated measures was used to estimate annualized BMD change across time between supplement users and nonusers, unadjusted or fully adjusted (age, race, height, weight, menopausal status [pre‐, early peri‐, late peri‐, and postmenopausal], DXA scanner mode, alcohol intake, vitamin D supplement use, smoking, and physical activity) and a log‐linear model with repeated measures was used to estimate the relative risk of fracture by calcium supplement use. All models were also stratified by baseline menopausal status. In fully adjusted models, calcium supplement use was associated with less annualized loss of femoral neck BMD (−0.0032 versus −0.0040 g/cm2/year; p < .001) and lumbar spine BMD (−0.0046 versus −0.0053 g/cm2/year, p = 0.021) in the complete cohort. However, this protective association of…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,490 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free