Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Mar 16.
Published in final edited form as: Calcif Tissue Int. 2001 May;68(5):259–270. doi: 10.1007/bf02390832

Table 1.

Effect sizes comparing bone mass according to smoking statusa

Bone site Current vs. nonsmokersb
Ever vs. never smokers
Current vs. never smokers
d 95% CL n d 95% CL n d 95% CL n
Combined −0.10 −0.12, −0.08 52 −0.10 −0.14, −0.06 21 −0.13 −0.18, −0.08 13
Lumbar spine −0.08 −0.12, −0.04 27 −0.03 −0.07, 0.01 12 −0.16 −0.27, −0.05 5
Forearm −0.07 −0.09, −0.05 25 −0.07 −0.11, −0.03 8 −0.08 −0.14, −0.02 5
Os calcis −0.13 −0.19, −0.07 8 −0.12 −0.18, −0.06 4 −0.12 −0.18, −0.06 3
Hip −0.18 −0.24, −0.12 21 −0.13 −0.21, −0.05 10 −0.29 −0.43, −0.15 5
a

Studies of clinical samples with diseases affecting bone metabolism were excluded [1624]

b

Includes both never smokers and former smokers