<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-model type="application/xml-dtd" href="https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.3/JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" specific-use="Marcalyc 1.3" dtd-version="1.3" article-type="research-article" xml:lang="en">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="index">6920</journal-id>
<journal-title-group>
<journal-title specific-use="original" xml:lang="en">Iberoamerican Journal of Medicine</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher" xml:lang="en">Iberoam J Med</abbrev-journal-title>
</journal-title-group>
<issn pub-type="epub">2695-5075</issn>
<issn-l>2695-5075</issn-l>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Hospital San Pedro</publisher-name>
<publisher-loc>
<country>España</country>
<email>eestebanz@riojasalud.es</email>
</publisher-loc>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="art-access-id" specific-use="redalyc">692082905003</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.53986/ibjm.2025.0024</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Original article</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en">Common errors in dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) examinations: insights from a cross-sectional study in Northeastern Brazil</article-title>
<trans-title-group>
<trans-title xml:lang="es">Errores comunes en las exploraciones de absorciometría dual de rayos X (DXA): hallazgos de un estudio transversal en el noreste de Brasil</trans-title>
</trans-title-group>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4920-7309</contrib-id>
<name name-style="western">
<surname>Rosendo</surname>
<given-names>Luiz Henrique</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5013-6278</contrib-id>
<name name-style="western">
<surname>Silva</surname>
<given-names>Lucas</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="corresp" rid="corresp1"/>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3"/>
<email>lucas.silva@famed.ufal.br</email>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no">
<contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1137-2788</contrib-id>
<name name-style="western">
<surname>Gondim</surname>
<given-names>Cátia</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff5"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1">
<institution content-type="original"> Hospital Universitário Alcides Carneiro, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, Brazil </institution>
<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
<institution-wrap>
<institution content-type="orgname"> Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande </institution>
</institution-wrap>
</aff>
<aff id="aff3">
<institution content-type="original"> Faculty of Medical Sciences, Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Maceió, Brazil </institution>
<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
<institution-wrap>
<institution content-type="orgname"> Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Maceió </institution>
</institution-wrap>
</aff>
<aff id="aff5">
<institution content-type="original"> Hospital Universitário Alcides Carneiro, Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, Brazil </institution>
<country country="BR">Brasil</country>
<institution-wrap>
<institution content-type="orgname"> Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande </institution>
</institution-wrap>
</aff>
<author-notes>
<corresp id="corresp1">
<email>lucas.silva@famed.ufal.br</email>
</corresp>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub-ppub">
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>7</volume>
<issue>4</issue>
<fpage>108</fpage>
<lpage>112</lpage>
<history>
<date date-type="received" publication-format="dd mes yyyy">
<day>25</day>
<month>08</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
<date date-type="corrected" publication-format="dd mes yyyy">
<day>08</day>
<month>10</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted" publication-format="dd mes yyyy">
<day>12</day>
<month>10</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<ali:free_to_read/>
</permissions>
<abstract xml:lang="en">
<title>Abstract</title>
<p>
<underline>Introduction</underline>: Common technical errors in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) exams may compromise diagnostic accuracy. This study aims to analyze the frequency and types of those errors in DXA scans performed in a referral center.</p>
<p>
<underline>Material and methods</underline>: This cross-sectional study evaluated 100 DXA exams performed at multiple radiology clinics and analyzed at the General Outpatient Clinic of the Medical Residency Program in Endocrinology and Metabolism at Alcides Carneiro University Hospital (HUAC), in Campina Grande. Exams were assessed for technical errors, including improper positioning, vertebral exclusion, and inaccurate region of interest (ROI) definition. Patient demographic data (age, sex, body mass index) were also collected. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics and the frequency of errors.</p>
<p>
<underline>Results</underline>: The study population had a mean age of 65.6 years (± 10 years), with a predominance of female patients (95%). The mean BMI was 26.4 kg/m² (±4.8 kg/m²). Regarding ethnicity, 91% of the sample identified as white. A total of 76% of exams presented at least one technical error, with the most common being osteophyte presence (64%), inadequate femoral rotation (45%), and incorrect ROI (35%). Only 24% of the exams were free of errors. </p>
<p>
<underline>Conclusions</underline>: These findings highlight the need for systematic training and strict adherence to imaging protocols to improve diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes. </p>
</abstract>
<trans-abstract xml:lang="es">
<title>Resumen</title>
<p>
<underline>Introducción</underline>: Los errores técnicos frecuentes en las exploraciones de absorciometría dual de rayos X (DXA) pueden comprometer la precisión diagnóstica. Este estudio tiene como objetivo analizar dichos errores en una unidad de referencia.</p>
<p>
<underline>Material y métodos</underline>: Se trata de un estudio transversal que evaluó 100 exploraciones de DXA realizadas en diversas clínicas de radiología y analizadas en el Ambulatorio General del Programa de Residencia Médica en Endocrinología y Metabolismo del Hospital Universitario Alcides Carneiro (HUAC), en Campina Grande. Se examinaron los errores técnicos, incluidos el posicionamiento inadecuado, la exclusión vertebral y la definición incorrecta de la región de interés (ROI). También se recopilaron datos demográficos de los pacientes (edad, sexo e índice de masa corporal). Se utilizaron estadísticas descriptivas para resumir las características de los pacientes y la frecuencia de errores.</p>
<p>
<underline>Resultados</underline>: La población del estudio presentó una edad media de 65,6 años (±10 años), con predominio de mujeres (95%). El IMC medio fue de 26,4 kg/m² (±4,8 kg/m²). En cuanto a la etnicidad, el 91% de la muestra se identificó como blanca. El 76% de los exámenes presentó al menos un error técnico, siendo los más frecuentes la presencia de osteofitos (64%), la rotación femoral inadecuada (45%) y la delimitación incorrecta de la ROI (35%). Solo el 24% de las exploraciones estuvieron libres de errores.</p>
<p>
<underline>Conclusiones</underline>: Estos hallazgos subrayan la necesidad de formación sistemática y del cumplimiento riguroso de los protocolos de imagen para mejorar la precisión diagnóstica y los resultados en los pacientes.</p>
</trans-abstract>
<kwd-group xml:lang="en">
<title>Keywords</title>
<kwd>Bone densitometry</kwd>
<kwd>Osteoporosis</kwd>
<kwd>Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry</kwd>
<kwd>Fracture risk</kwd>
<kwd>Diagnostic accuracy</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<kwd-group xml:lang="es">
<title>Palabras clave</title>
<kwd>Densitometría ósea</kwd>
<kwd>Osteoporosis</kwd>
<kwd>Absorciometría dual de rayos X</kwd>
<kwd>Riesgo de fractura</kwd>
<kwd>Precisión diagnóstica</kwd>
</kwd-group>
<counts>
<fig-count count="1"/>
<table-count count="0"/>
<equation-count count="0"/>
<ref-count count="21"/>
</counts>
<custom-meta-group>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>redalyc-journal-id</meta-name>
<meta-value>6920</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-group>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec>
<title>
<bold> INTRODUCTION </bold>
</title>
<p>Osteoporosis is a metabolic bone disease characterized by decreased bone strength, predisposing individuals to fractures, even from low-impact events such as falls from standing height [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref1">1</xref>]. The most common fracture sites include the distal radius, vertebrae, and proximal femur, with particularly severe consequences among older adults due to the associated morbidity and mortality [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref2">2</xref>]. Early detection and effective management are critical to mitigating the disease’s clinical burden.</p>
<p>Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is the gold standard for diagnosing osteoporosis, providing quantitative measures such as bone mineral density (BMD), T-scores, and Z-scores, which guide clinical decisions [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref3">3</xref>]. However, DXA results can be significantly compromised by technical errors during image acquisition and processing [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref4">4</xref>]. Improper patient positioning, failure to exclude bone artifacts (e.g., osteophytes or prosthetic implants), and incorrect vertebral selection can result in misinterpretation of BMD values, leading to either overestimation or underestimation of bone loss [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref5">5</xref>].</p>
<p>These technical errors are often linked to the operator-dependent nature of DXA and highlight the importance of consistent image acquisition protocols and operator training [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref6">6</xref>]. Incorrect diagnoses may delay treatment initiation or lead to unnecessary therapeutic interventions, potentially increasing healthcare costs and patient burden [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref7">7</xref>]. Furthermore, DXA plays a crucial role in monitoring treatment responses, underscoring the need for precision at the initial diagnosis.</p>
<p>This study aims to evaluate the profile and prevalence of technical errors in DXA exams conducted at a referral hospital. By identifying common pitfalls, we aim to propose recommendations for minimizing diagnostic errors and optimizing the clinical management of osteoporosis.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<bold> MATERIAL AND METHODS </bold>
</title>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Study design and setting</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>This study was designed as a cross-sectional, observational, and descriptive analysis conducted at Alcides Carneiro University Hospital (HUAC), a referral institution in endocrinology and metabolism located in Paraíba, Brazil. The hospital is affiliated with the Federal University of Campina Grande (UFCG) and provides specialized outpatient care for patients undergoing routine clinical exams in the Medical Residency Program. The bone densitometry exams were performed at various radiology clinics throughout the city and were independently reanalyzed by an endocrinologist with over ten years of experience in bone metabolism and densitometry interpretation, formally trained according to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) standards.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Study population</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>The study included patients over the age of 18 who underwent DXA exams at the General Outpatient Clinic between June 2024 and November 2024. The sampling was non-probabilistic and based on convenience, comprising patients who provided informed consent.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Eligibility criteria</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>Inclusion criteria: Patients aged 18 years or older, with DXA exams performed as part of routine clinical care, and who signed the informed consent form.</p>
<p>Exclusion criteria: Patients under the age of 18, DXA exams for whole-body composition assessment, and exams missing critical clinical or demographic information.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Data collection and procedures</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>Demographic and clinical data were collected, including age, sex, weight, and body mass index (BMI). The DXA exams were evaluated for technical errors, such as improper patient positioning, inadequate region of interest (ROI) selection, and failure to exclude artifacts. Images were analyzed using standardized protocols to identify technical and diagnostic inconsistencies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref8">8</xref>].</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Statistical analysis</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the demographic characteristics of the study population and the frequency of technical errors. Categorical variables were presented as frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were described using means and standard deviations. All analyses were performed using SPSS software, version 25.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Ethical considerations</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>The study was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles outlined in the Brazilian National Health Council Resolution No. 466/2012. Approval was obtained from the HUAC Ethics Committee under number: 79465024.5.0000.5182. All participants provided informed consent prior to enrollment.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<bold> RESULTS </bold>
</title>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Demographic characteristics</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>100 patients underwent DXA exams, with a mean age of 65.6 ± 10 years. The majority of participants were female (95%) and of white ethnicity (91%). The average body weight was 62 ± 12.4 kg, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 26.4 ± 4.8 kg/m².</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Prevalence of technical errors</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>Among the 100 DXA exams evaluated, 76% exhibited at least one technical error. Of these, the most common error was the presence of osteophytes, identified in 64% of exams followed by inadequate femoral rotation (45%) and incorrect ROI (35%). Incorrect vertebral cataloging was the least frequent error (16%). It is noteworthy that no artifacts were observed in the analyzed exams. Only 24% of exams were free of any technical errors.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<italic>
<bold>Discrepancies in osteoporotic diagnosis</bold>
</italic>
</title>
<p>The initial reports diagnosed 34% of patients with osteoporosis, 44% with osteopenia, and 22% with normal bone mass. However, when analyzing only the exams containing any type of error, the rate of normal diagnoses increases, while the rates of osteopenia and osteoporosis decrease. <xref ref-type="fig" rid="gf1">Figure 1</xref> represents those values.</p>
<p>
<fig id="gf1">
<label>Figure 1</label>
<caption>
<title>Comparison of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry diagnoses distribution between all exams and those with technical errors </title>
</caption>
<alt-text>Figure 1 Comparison of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry diagnoses distribution between all exams and those with technical errors </alt-text>
<graphic xlink:href="692082905003_gf2.png" position="anchor" orientation="portrait">
<alt-text>Figure 1 Comparison of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry diagnoses distribution between all exams and those with technical errors </alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<bold> DISCUSSION </bold>
</title>
<p>The demographic profile of the patients in this study aligns with known osteoporosis risk factors, reinforcing the need for precise DXA assessments. The mean age of 65.6 years and the predominance of female patients reflect the well-established higher prevalence of osteoporosis in postmenopausal women due to hormonal changes affecting bone density [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref9">9</xref>]. Additionally, the mean BMI of 26.4 kg/m² suggests that many patients fall within the overweight range, which can influence DXA accuracy, as higher soft tissue composition may lead to overestimated bone mineral density values [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref10">10</xref>]. Ethnicity is another critical variable, as 91% of the sample identified as white, a group with generally lower bone mass compared to individuals of African descent, who tend to have higher peak bone density [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref11">11</xref>].</p>
<p>Additionally, this work still reveals a high prevalence of technical errors in DXA exams, with significant implications for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. The most frequent error observed was the presence of osteophytes, affecting 64% of the exams. Osteophytes can falsely elevate BMD readings, leading to the underdiagnosis of osteoporosis and inappropriate clinical management [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref7">7</xref>]. Studies have shown that undetected osteophytes can obscure the severity of bone loss, potentially delaying the initiation of preventive therapies for fractures [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref12">12</xref>].</p>
<p>Another frequent issue was inadequate femoral rotation, present in 45% of cases, which led to the inclusion of the lesser trochanter in the image, thereby falsely elevating BMD measurements [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref13">13</xref>]. Errors in the selection and exclusion of vertebrae were identified in 24% of cases. Improper exclusion of abnormal vertebrae, as highlighted in the literature, can result in inaccurate diagnoses of osteopenia or osteoporosis, depending on the affected vertebrae [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref13">13</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref14">14</xref>]. Additionally, incorrect vertebral cataloging, observed in 16% of exams, can further distort diagnostic outcomes, particularly when L1 is misidentified or confused with T12 [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref15">15</xref>].</p>
<p>The presence of scoliosis, noted in 20% of cases, represents another critical diagnostic challenge. Scoliosis alters spinal curvature and bone density measurements, increasing the likelihood of false-negative or false-positive results, as previously documented in clinical studies [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref16">16</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref17">17</xref>]. Furthermore, incorrect ROI selection, affecting 20% of the exams, underscores the importance of proper operator training and adherence to standardized imaging protocols [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref18">18</xref>].</p>
<p>Comparisons with international studies provide valuable context. For instance, the error rate in vertebral cataloging in this study (16%) was lower than the 38% reported in Ecuador [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref19">19</xref>] but similar to findings from Turkey, where error rates ranged from 10.5% to 65.5% depending on the institution [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref20">20</xref>]. This variability highlights the critical role of institutional protocols and operator experience in minimizing technical errors [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref6">6</xref>].</p>
<p>Errors in DXA scans can lead to significant misclassification, particularly underestimating osteoporosis diagnoses. In the analyzed data, exams with technical errors showed an increased rate of normal diagnoses and reduced rates of osteopenia and osteoporosis, highlighting the risk of false-negative results. Similar findings have been reported, with studies indicating that technical errors in DXA occur frequently and can result in misdiagnoses, potentially delaying appropriate treatment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref21">21</xref>]. These inaccuracies underscore the importance of rigorous quality control and standardized protocols to ensure accurate bone density assessment, in this context secondary reviews improve diagnostic sensitivity by addressing errors in image acquisition and interpretation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="redalyc_692082905003_ref17">17</xref>].</p>
<p>This study is limited by its non-probabilistic sampling, which restricts the generalization of findings. Additionally, the single-researcher analysis may have introduced observer bias, despite adherence to protocols. Future research should involve larger, multicenter samples and automated quality control to minimize bias and improve reliability.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>
<bold> CONFLICT OF INTERESTS </bold>
</title>
<p>The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. The authors declared that this study has received no financial support.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<ref-list>
<title>REFERENCES</title>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref1">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>1.Pouresmaeili F, Kamalidehghan B, Kamarehei M, Goh YM. A comprehensive overview on osteoporosis and its risk factors. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018;14:2029-49. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S138000.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>A comprehensive overview on osteoporosis and its risk factors</article-title>
<source>Pouresmaeili F, Kamalidehghan B, Kamarehei M, Goh YM. A comprehensive overview on osteoporosis and its risk factors. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2018;14:2029-49. doi: 10.2147/TCRM.S138000</source>
<year>2018</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref2">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>2.LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, et al. The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(10):2049-2102. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis</article-title>
<source>LeBoff MS, Greenspan SL, Insogna KL, Lewiecki EM, Saag KG, Singer AJ, et al. The clinician's guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(10):2049-2102. doi: 10.1007/s00198-021-05900-y</source>
<year>2022</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref3">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>3.Blake GM, Fogelman I. The role of DXA bone density scans in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(982):509-17. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2007.057505.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>The role of DXA bone density scans in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis</article-title>
<source>Blake GM, Fogelman I. The role of DXA bone density scans in the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis. Postgrad Med J. 2007;83(982):509-17. doi: 10.1136/pgmj.2007.057505</source>
<year>2007</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref4">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>4.Choksi P, Jepsen KJ, Clines GA. The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;4:12. doi: 10.1186/s40842-018-0062-7.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools</article-title>
<source>Choksi P, Jepsen KJ, Clines GA. The challenges of diagnosing osteoporosis and the limitations of currently available tools. Clin Diabetes Endocrinol. 2018;4:12. doi: 10.1186/s40842-018-0062-7</source>
<year>2018</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref5">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>5.Krueger D, Shives E, Siglinsky E, Libber J, Buehring B, Hansen KE, et al. DXA Errors Are Common and Reduced by Use of a Reporting Template. J Clin Densitom. 2019;22(1):115-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2018.07.014.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>DXA Errors Are Common and Reduced by Use of a Reporting Template</article-title>
<source>Krueger D, Shives E, Siglinsky E, Libber J, Buehring B, Hansen KE, et al. DXA Errors Are Common and Reduced by Use of a Reporting Template. J Clin Densitom. 2019;22(1):115-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2018.07.014</source>
<year>2019</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref6">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>6.US Preventive Services Task Force; Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, Barry MJ, Caughey AB, et al. Screening for Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2018;319(24):2521-31. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.7498.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Screening for Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement</article-title>
<source>US Preventive Services Task Force; Curry SJ, Krist AH, Owens DK, Barry MJ, Caughey AB, et al. Screening for Osteoporosis to Prevent Fractures: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2018;319(24):2521-31. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.7498</source>
<year>2018</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref7">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>7.Martineau P, Morgan SL, Leslie WD. Bone Mineral Densitometry Reporting: Pearls and Pitfalls. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2021;72(3):490-504. doi: 10.1177/0846537120919627. </italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Bone Mineral Densitometry Reporting: Pearls and Pitfalls</article-title>
<source>Martineau P, Morgan SL, Leslie WD. Bone Mineral Densitometry Reporting: Pearls and Pitfalls. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2021;72(3):490-504. doi: 10.1177/0846537120919627</source>
<year>2021</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref8">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>8.Slart RHJA, Punda M, Ali DS, Bazzocchi A, Bock O, Camacho P, et al. Updated practice guideline for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2025;52(2):539-63. doi: 10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Updated practice guideline for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)</article-title>
<source>Slart RHJA, Punda M, Ali DS, Bazzocchi A, Bock O, Camacho P, et al. Updated practice guideline for dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2025;52(2):539-63. doi: 10.1007/s00259-024-06912-6</source>
<year>2025</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref9">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>9.Charde SH, Joshi A, Raut J. A Comprehensive Review on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in Women. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e48582. doi: 10.7759/cureus.48582.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>A Comprehensive Review on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in Women</article-title>
<source>Charde SH, Joshi A, Raut J. A Comprehensive Review on Postmenopausal Osteoporosis in Women. Cureus. 2023;15(11):e48582. doi: 10.7759/cureus.48582</source>
<year>2023</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref10">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>10.Liu Y, Liu Y, Huang Y, Le S, Jiang H, Ruan B, et al. The effect of overweight or obesity on osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nutr. 2023;42(12):2457-67. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2023.10.013.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>The effect of overweight or obesity on osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis</article-title>
<source>Liu Y, Liu Y, Huang Y, Le S, Jiang H, Ruan B, et al. The effect of overweight or obesity on osteoporosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Nutr. 2023;42(12):2457-67. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2023.10.013</source>
<year>2023</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref11">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>11.Cauley JA. Defining ethnic and racial differences in osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(7):1891-9. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1863-5.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Defining ethnic and racial differences in osteoporosis and fragility fractures</article-title>
<source>Cauley JA. Defining ethnic and racial differences in osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(7):1891-9. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1863-5</source>
<year>2011</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref12">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>12.Watts NB. Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(11):847-54. doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1681-7.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)</article-title>
<source>Watts NB. Fundamentals and pitfalls of bone densitometry using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporos Int. 2004;15(11):847-54. doi: 10.1007/s00198-004-1681-7</source>
<year>2004</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref13">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>13.Brandão CM, Camargos BM, Zerbini CA, Plapler PG, Mendonça LM, Albergaria BH, et al. [2008 official positions of the Brazilian Society for Clinical Densitometry--SBDens]. Arq Bras Endocrinol Metabol. 2009;53(1):107-12. doi: 10.1590/s0004-27302009000100016.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>[2008 official positions of the Brazilian Society for Clinical Densitometry--SBDens]</article-title>
<source>Brandão CM, Camargos BM, Zerbini CA, Plapler PG, Mendonça LM, Albergaria BH, et al. [2008 official positions of the Brazilian Society for Clinical Densitometry--SBDens]. Arq Bras Endocrinol Metabol. 2009;53(1):107-12. doi: 10.1590/s0004-27302009000100016</source>
<year>2009</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref14">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>14.Ensrud KE, Crandall CJ. Osteoporosis. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167(3):ITC17-ITC32. doi: 10.7326/AITC201708010.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Osteoporosis</article-title>
<source>Ensrud KE, Crandall CJ. Osteoporosis. Ann Intern Med. 2017;167(3):ITC17-ITC32. doi: 10.7326/AITC201708010</source>
<year>2017</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref15">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>15.Kecskemethy HH, Kubaski F, Harcke HT, Tomatsu S. Bone mineral density in MPS IV A (Morquio syndrome type A). Mol Genet Metab. 2016;117(2):144-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2015.11.013.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Bone mineral density in MPS IV A (Morquio syndrome type A)</article-title>
<source>Kecskemethy HH, Kubaski F, Harcke HT, Tomatsu S. Bone mineral density in MPS IV A (Morquio syndrome type A). Mol Genet Metab. 2016;117(2):144-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ymgme.2015.11.013</source>
<year>2016</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref16">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>16.Izadyar S, Golbarg S, Takavar A, Zakariaee SS. The Effect of the Lumbar Vertebral Malpositioning on Bone Mineral Density Measurements of the Lumbar Spine by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry. J Clin Densitom. 2016;19(3):277-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.12.001.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>he Effect of the Lumbar Vertebral Malpositioning on Bone Mineral Density Measurements of the Lumbar Spine by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry</article-title>
<source>Izadyar S, Golbarg S, Takavar A, Zakariaee SS. The Effect of the Lumbar Vertebral Malpositioning on Bone Mineral Density Measurements of the Lumbar Spine by Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry. J Clin Densitom. 2016;19(3):277-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2015.12.001</source>
<year>2016</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref17">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>17.Jung EY, Park SJ, Shim HE, Cho YJ, Lee JM, Lee SS, et al. Multidisciplinary team training reduces the error rate of DXA image. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):115. doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-00791-8.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Multidisciplinary team training reduces the error rate of DXA image</article-title>
<source>Jung EY, Park SJ, Shim HE, Cho YJ, Lee JM, Lee SS, et al. Multidisciplinary team training reduces the error rate of DXA image. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):115. doi: 10.1007/s11657-020-00791-8</source>
<year>2020</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref18">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>18.Gong B, Mandair GS, Wehrli FW, Morris MD. Novel assessment tools for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2014;12(3):357-65. doi: 10.1007/s11914-014-0215-2.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Novel assessment tools for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment</article-title>
<source>Gong B, Mandair GS, Wehrli FW, Morris MD. Novel assessment tools for osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment. Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2014;12(3):357-65. doi: 10.1007/s11914-014-0215-2</source>
<year>2014</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref19">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>19.Maldonado G, Intriago M, Larroude M, Aguilar G, Moreno M, Gonzalez J, et al. Common errors in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans in imaging centers in Ecuador. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):6. doi: 10.1007/s11657-019-0673-3.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Common errors in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans in imaging centers in Ecuador</article-title>
<source>Maldonado G, Intriago M, Larroude M, Aguilar G, Moreno M, Gonzalez J, et al. Common errors in dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scans in imaging centers in Ecuador. Arch Osteoporos. 2020;15(1):6. doi: 10.1007/s11657-019-0673-3</source>
<year>2020</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref20">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>20.Karahan AY, Kaya B, Kuran B, Altındag O, Yildirim P, Dogan SC, et al. Common Mistakes in the Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) in Turkey. A Retrospective Descriptive Multicenter Study. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2016;59(4):117-23. doi: 10.14712/18059694.2017.38. </italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Common Mistakes in the Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) in Turkey. A Retrospective Descriptive Multicenter Study</article-title>
<source>Karahan AY, Kaya B, Kuran B, Altındag O, Yildirim P, Dogan SC, et al. Common Mistakes in the Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA) in Turkey. A Retrospective Descriptive Multicenter Study. Acta Medica (Hradec Kralove). 2016;59(4):117-23. doi: 10.14712/18059694.2017.38</source>
<year>2016</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="redalyc_692082905003_ref21">
<mixed-citation publication-type="journal">
<italic>21.Lewiecki EM, Binkley N, Morgan SL, Shuhart CR, Camargos BM, Carey JJ, et al. Best Practices for Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Measurement and Reporting: International Society for Clinical Densitometry Guidance. J Clin Densitom. 2016;19(2):127-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2016.03.003.</italic>
</mixed-citation>
<element-citation publication-type="journal">
<article-title>Best Practices for Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Measurement and Reporting: International Society for Clinical Densitometry Guidance</article-title>
<source>Lewiecki EM, Binkley N, Morgan SL, Shuhart CR, Camargos BM, Carey JJ, et al. Best Practices for Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Measurement and Reporting: International Society for Clinical Densitometry Guidance. J Clin Densitom. 2016;19(2):127-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2016.03.003</source>
<year>2016</year>
</element-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>