. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Oct 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Clin Densitom. 2010 Jul 21;13(4):379–384. doi: 10.1016/j.jocd.2010.05.007

Table 2.

Comparisons of agreement between US white, North Indian, and South Indian reference standards in the diagnosis of osteoporosis and osteopenia in South Asian Indians residing in the United States

A. Total Hip, US White versus South Indian					B. Total Hip, US White versus North Indian
	Count (%)^a	South Indian				Count (%)	North Indian
	Count (%)^a	Normal	Osteopenia	Osteoporosis		Count (%)	Normal	Osteopenia	Osteoporosis
US White	Normal	114 (76)	0 (0)	0 (0)	US White	Normal	114 (76)	0 (0)	0 (0)
	Osteopenia	28 (19)	6 (4)	0 (0)		Osteopenia	18 (12)	16 (11)	0 (0)
	Osteoporosis	0 (0)	1 (1)	1 (1)		Osteoporosis	0 (0)	1 (1)	1 (1)
	% reclassified^b = 19% (95% CI, 14–25%)					% reclassified = 13% (95% CI, 7–18%)
	Mean T- score difference^c = 1.26 (95% CI, 1.22–1.30)					Mean T-score difference = 0.81 (95% CI, 0.75 – 0.86)
C. Total Hip, North Indian versus South Indian					D. Lumbar Spine, US White versus South Indian
	Count (%)	South Indian				Count (%)	South Indian
	Count (%)	Normal	Osteopenia	Osteoporosis		Count (%)	Normal	Osteopenia	Osteoporosis
North Indian	Normal	132 (88)	0 (0)	0 (0)	US White	Normal	75(50)	0 (0)	0 (0)
	Osteopenia	10 (7)	7 (6)	0 (0)		Osteopenia	46 (31)	11 (7)	0 (0)
	Osteoporosis	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (1)		Osteoporosis	0 (0)	14 (9)	4 (3)
	% reclassified = 7% (95% CI = 3–12%)					% reclassified = 40% (95% CI = 32–48%)
	Mean T-score difference = 0.45 (95% CI = 0.38–0.51)					Mean T-score difference 1.09 (95% CI, 1.08–1.09)

Due to rounding error percentages may not sum to 100%, and individual percents of reclassified individuals may not sum to the total % reclassified.

^b,c

% reclassified and mean T-score difference are, respectively the percentage of individuals whose BMD category assignment changed, and mean change in T-score, that resulted from switching between a given pair of reference standards.