Table III.
Comparisons of energy absorption versus various morphometric and densitometric characteristics considered individually (r-values are shown). Shown are the strongest correlations from the current, as well as our previous study.1 These are results of Pearson correlation analyses
| Characteristics | r-value | p-value |
|---|---|---|
| Age | -0.62 | < 0.001 |
| Present study | ||
| Areal cortical index (D2-D3) | 0.42 | 0.01 |
| Areal cortical index (D3-D4) | 0.43 | 0.01 |
| Areal cortical index (D2-D4) | 0.30 | 0.1 |
| C-C ratio | 0.27 | 0.1 |
| Medial cortical ratio (at D3) | 0.31 | 0.08 |
| Previous study | ||
| HH ML breadth | 0.69 | < 0.001 |
| H1 mmAl | 0.65 | < 0.001 |
| Avg. head (H1-H3) mmAl | 0.64 | < 0.001 |
D2, 2 cm below surgical neck; D3, 5 cm below surgical neck; D4, 7 cm below surgical neck; C-C, canal-to-calcar ratio (analogous to C-C ratio in proximal femur); HH, humeral head; ML, medial-lateral; H, head; mmAl, millimetres of aluminium; Avg., averaged