Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Aug 16.
Published in final edited form as: Osteoporos Int. 2009 Oct 3;21(7):1205–1214. doi: 10.1007/s00198-009-1057-0

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

Fig. 1

The distributions of FNGPs against age in both Caucasian and Chinese (black lines for males; broken lines for females). a Males vs. females, in Caucasian: p < 0.001, slope = 0.00076 vs. p = 0.001, slope = 0.00021; in Chinese: p < 0.001, slope = 0.00045 vs. p < 0.001, slope = 0.00057. b Males vs. females, in Caucasian: p < 0.001, slope = −0.0018 vs. p < 0.001, slope = −0.0021 in Chinese: p < 0.001, slope = −0.0021 vs. p < 0.001, slope = −0.0022. c Males vs. females: in Caucasian: p < 0.001, slope = −0.00077 vs. p = 0.04, slope = −0.0011 in Chinese: p < 0.001, slope = −0.00051 vs. p < 0.001, slope = −0.0021. d Males vs. females: in Caucasian: p < 0.001, slope = −0.000029 vs. p < 0.001, slope = −0.000039 in Chinese: p < 0.001, slope = −0.000048 vs. p < 0.001, slope = −0.000049. e Males vs. females: in Caucasian: p < 0.001, slope = 0.057 vs. p < 0.001, slope = 0.067 in Chinese: p < 0.001, slope = 0.068 vs. p < 0.001, slope = 0.069