scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Susan M. Ott

Bio: Susan M. Ott is an academic researcher from University of Washington. The author has contributed to research in topics: Bone density & Osteoporosis. The author has an hindex of 54, co-authored 173 publications receiving 23756 citations. Previous affiliations of Susan M. Ott include Northwestern University & University College London.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A committee of the Society to develop a unified system of termnology, suitable for adoption by the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research as part of its Instructions to Authors is formed, and is as complex and conceptually difficult as the field with which it deals.
Abstract: RACTITIONERS OF BONE HISTOMORPHOMETRY communicate P with each other in a variety of arcane languages, which in general are unintelligible to those outside the field. Many in the bone and mineral scientific community would like to keep abreast of the contributions of histology to their subject, but are dismayed by the semantic barriers they must overcome. The need for standardization has been recognized for many years,(') during which there has been much talk but no action. To meet the needs of ASBMR members, Dr. B.L. Riggs (President, 19851986) asked the senior author to convene a committee of the Society to develop a unified system of termnology, suitable for adoption by the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research as part of its Instructions to Authors. The committee includes members from Europe and Canada as well as the U.S., and represents most existing systems of nomenclature. A circular letter seeking suggestions and information on current usage was sent to several hundred persons, with names drawn from the Society membership roster and lists of attendees at various recent conferences, to which approximately 40 replies were obtained. These confirmed the magnitude of the semantic problem (for some measurements as many as nine different terms were in use) and suggested a range of solutions likely to be generally acceptable. In formulating the new system. the committee kept in mind certain agreed general principles. First, the primary reason for change was to help other scientists understand bone histomorphometry, not to help bone histomorphometrists undcntand each other. Second. names should be self-explanatory and dcscriptive, without implicit assumptions. Third. symbols should consist mainly of abbreviations that included the first letter of each word in the same order as in the name. without subscripts or superscripts. Fourth. each symbol component should have one and only one meaning, and so eliminate ambiguity. Fifth, primary measurements should be clearly distinguished from derived indices. Finally, the chosen system should be sufficiently flexible to apply to all surfaces and all types of bone, and to accommodate any new primary measurement or derived index. The recommended system shares common elements with. but also differs substantially from. all those in current usc. was tested in practice for several months before the final forniat was chosen, and is as complex and conceptually difficult ;I\\ the field with which it deals. For those within the field we hope that increased readership of their papers will be adequate conipensation for the inconvcnicncc of learning a new systcm. For those outside the field, mastering the new system will be hard work, but if we are able to secure its acceptance by all journals with an interest in bone and mineral metabolism, the effort will only have to be expended once rather than. as at present. rcpeated many times. To this end we give the reasons for our decisions in the areas of controversy and, as well as definitions, provide methods for calculation of derived indices and

5,130 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Among women with low bone mass and existing vertebral fractures, alendronate is well tolerated and substantially reduces the frequency of morphometric and clinical vertebra fractures, as well as other clinical fractures.

3,730 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The key revisions include omission of terminology used before 1987, recommendations regarding the parameters and technical information that should be included in all histomorphometry articles, recommendations on how to handle dynamic parameters of bone formation in settings of low bone turnover, and updating of references.
Abstract: Before publication of the original version of this report in 1987, practitioners of bone histomorphometry communicated with each other in a variety of arcane languages, which in general were unintelligible to those outside the field. The need for standardization of nomenclature had been recognized for many years,(1) during which there had been much talk but no action. To satisfy this need, B Lawrence Riggs (ASBMR President, 1985 to 1986) asked A Michael Parfitt to convene an ASBMR committee to develop a new and unified system of terminology, suitable for adoption by the Journal of Bone and Mineral Research (JBMR) as part of its Instructions to Authors. The resulting recommendations were published in 1987(2) and were quickly adopted not only by JBMR but also by all respected journals in the bone field. The recommendations improved markedly the ability of histomorphometrists to communicate with each other and with nonhistomorphometrists, leading to a broader understanding and appreciation of histomorphometric data. In 2012, 25 years after the development of the standardized nomenclature system, Thomas L Clemens (Editor in Chief of JBMR) felt that it was time to revise and update the recommendations. The original committee was reconvened by David W Dempster, who appointed one new member, Juliet E Compston. The original document was circulated to the committee members and was extensively revised according to their current recommendations. The key revisions include omission of terminology used before 1987, recommendations regarding the parameters and technical information that should be included in all histomorphometry articles, recommendations on how to handle dynamic parameters of bone formation in settings of low bone turnover, and updating of references.

2,035 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is recommended that the term renal osteodystrophy be used exclusively to define alterations in bone morphology associated with CKD, and the term CKD-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD) be used to describe a broader clinical syndrome that develops as a systemic disorder of mineral and bone metabolism due to CKD.

1,698 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Giuseppe Mancia1, Robert Fagard, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, Josep Redon, Alberto Zanchetti, Michael Böhm, Thierry Christiaens, Renata Cifkova, Guy De Backer, Anna F. Dominiczak, Maurizio Galderisi, Diederick E. Grobbee, Tiny Jaarsma, Paulus Kirchhof, Sverre E. Kjeldsen, Stéphane Laurent, Athanasios J. Manolis, Peter M. Nilsson, Luis M. Ruilope, Roland E. Schmieder, Per Anton Sirnes, Peter Sleight, Margus Viigimaa, Bernard Waeber, Faiez Zannad, Michel Burnier, Ettore Ambrosioni, Mark Caufield, Antonio Coca, Michael H. Olsen, Costas Tsioufis, Philippe van de Borne, José Luis Zamorano, Stephan Achenbach, Helmut Baumgartner, Jeroen J. Bax, Héctor Bueno, Veronica Dean, Christi Deaton, Çetin Erol, Roberto Ferrari, David Hasdai, Arno W. Hoes, Juhani Knuuti, Philippe Kolh2, Patrizio Lancellotti, Aleš Linhart, Petros Nihoyannopoulos, Massimo F Piepoli, Piotr Ponikowski, Juan Tamargo, Michal Tendera, Adam Torbicki, William Wijns, Stephan Windecker, Denis Clement, Thierry C. Gillebert, Enrico Agabiti Rosei, Stefan D. Anker, Johann Bauersachs, Jana Brguljan Hitij, Mark J. Caulfield, Marc De Buyzere, Sabina De Geest, Geneviève Derumeaux, Serap Erdine, Csaba Farsang, Christian Funck-Brentano, Vjekoslav Gerc, Giuseppe Germanò, Stephan Gielen, Herman Haller, Jens Jordan, Thomas Kahan, Michel Komajda, Dragan Lovic, Heiko Mahrholdt, Jan Östergren, Gianfranco Parati, Joep Perk, Jorge Polónia, Bogdan A. Popescu, Zeljko Reiner, Lars Rydén, Yuriy Sirenko, Alice Stanton, Harry A.J. Struijker-Boudier, Charalambos Vlachopoulos, Massimo Volpe, David A. Wood 
TL;DR: In this article, a randomized controlled trial of Aliskiren in the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Elderly people was presented. But the authors did not discuss the effect of the combination therapy in patients living with systolic hypertension.
Abstract: ABCD : Appropriate Blood pressure Control in Diabetes ABI : ankle–brachial index ABPM : ambulatory blood pressure monitoring ACCESS : Acute Candesartan Cilexetil Therapy in Stroke Survival ACCOMPLISH : Avoiding Cardiovascular Events in Combination Therapy in Patients Living with Systolic Hypertension ACCORD : Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ACE : angiotensin-converting enzyme ACTIVE I : Atrial Fibrillation Clopidogrel Trial with Irbesartan for Prevention of Vascular Events ADVANCE : Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron-MR Controlled Evaluation AHEAD : Action for HEAlth in Diabetes ALLHAT : Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart ATtack ALTITUDE : ALiskiren Trial In Type 2 Diabetes Using Cardio-renal Endpoints ANTIPAF : ANgioTensin II Antagonist In Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation APOLLO : A Randomized Controlled Trial of Aliskiren in the Prevention of Major Cardiovascular Events in Elderly People ARB : angiotensin receptor blocker ARIC : Atherosclerosis Risk In Communities ARR : aldosterone renin ratio ASCOT : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial ASCOT-LLA : Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial—Lipid Lowering Arm ASTRAL : Angioplasty and STenting for Renal Artery Lesions A-V : atrioventricular BB : beta-blocker BMI : body mass index BP : blood pressure BSA : body surface area CA : calcium antagonist CABG : coronary artery bypass graft CAPPP : CAPtopril Prevention Project CAPRAF : CAndesartan in the Prevention of Relapsing Atrial Fibrillation CHD : coronary heart disease CHHIPS : Controlling Hypertension and Hypertension Immediately Post-Stroke CKD : chronic kidney disease CKD-EPI : Chronic Kidney Disease—EPIdemiology collaboration CONVINCE : Controlled ONset Verapamil INvestigation of CV Endpoints CT : computed tomography CV : cardiovascular CVD : cardiovascular disease D : diuretic DASH : Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension DBP : diastolic blood pressure DCCT : Diabetes Control and Complications Study DIRECT : DIabetic REtinopathy Candesartan Trials DM : diabetes mellitus DPP-4 : dipeptidyl peptidase 4 EAS : European Atherosclerosis Society EASD : European Association for the Study of Diabetes ECG : electrocardiogram EF : ejection fraction eGFR : estimated glomerular filtration rate ELSA : European Lacidipine Study on Atherosclerosis ESC : European Society of Cardiology ESH : European Society of Hypertension ESRD : end-stage renal disease EXPLOR : Amlodipine–Valsartan Combination Decreases Central Systolic Blood Pressure more Effectively than the Amlodipine–Atenolol Combination FDA : U.S. Food and Drug Administration FEVER : Felodipine EVent Reduction study GISSI-AF : Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico-Atrial Fibrillation HbA1c : glycated haemoglobin HBPM : home blood pressure monitoring HOPE : Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation HOT : Hypertension Optimal Treatment HRT : hormone replacement therapy HT : hypertension HYVET : HYpertension in the Very Elderly Trial IMT : intima-media thickness I-PRESERVE : Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Systolic Function INTERHEART : Effect of Potentially Modifiable Risk Factors associated with Myocardial Infarction in 52 Countries INVEST : INternational VErapamil SR/T Trandolapril ISH : Isolated systolic hypertension JNC : Joint National Committee JUPITER : Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin LAVi : left atrial volume index LIFE : Losartan Intervention For Endpoint Reduction in Hypertensives LV : left ventricle/left ventricular LVH : left ventricular hypertrophy LVM : left ventricular mass MDRD : Modification of Diet in Renal Disease MRFIT : Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial MRI : magnetic resonance imaging NORDIL : The Nordic Diltiazem Intervention study OC : oral contraceptive OD : organ damage ONTARGET : ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in Combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial PAD : peripheral artery disease PATHS : Prevention And Treatment of Hypertension Study PCI : percutaneous coronary intervention PPAR : peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor PREVEND : Prevention of REnal and Vascular ENdstage Disease PROFESS : Prevention Regimen for Effectively Avoiding Secondary Strokes PROGRESS : Perindopril Protection Against Recurrent Stroke Study PWV : pulse wave velocity QALY : Quality adjusted life years RAA : renin-angiotensin-aldosterone RAS : renin-angiotensin system RCT : randomized controlled trials RF : risk factor ROADMAP : Randomized Olmesartan And Diabetes MicroAlbuminuria Prevention SBP : systolic blood pressure SCAST : Angiotensin-Receptor Blocker Candesartan for Treatment of Acute STroke SCOPE : Study on COgnition and Prognosis in the Elderly SCORE : Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation SHEP : Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program STOP : Swedish Trials in Old Patients with Hypertension STOP-2 : The second Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension SYSTCHINA : SYSTolic Hypertension in the Elderly: Chinese trial SYSTEUR : SYSTolic Hypertension in Europe TIA : transient ischaemic attack TOHP : Trials Of Hypertension Prevention TRANSCEND : Telmisartan Randomised AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease UKPDS : United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study VADT : Veterans' Affairs Diabetes Trial VALUE : Valsartan Antihypertensive Long-term Use Evaluation WHO : World Health Organization ### 1.1 Principles The 2013 guidelines on hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and the European Society of Cardiology …

14,173 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension : The Task Force for the management of Arterspertension of the European Society ofhypertension (ESH) and of theEuropean Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Abstract: Because of new evidence on several diagnostic and therapeutic aspects of hypertension, the present guidelines differ in many respects from the previous ones. Some of the most important differences are listed below: 1. Epidemiological data on hypertension and BP control in Europe. 2. Strengthening of the prognostic value of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and of its role for diagnosis and management of hypertension, next to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). 3. Update of the prognostic significance of night-time BP, white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension. 4. Re-emphasis on integration of BP, cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, asymptomatic organ damage (OD) and clinical complications for total CV risk assessment. 5. Update of the prognostic significance of asymptomatic OD, including heart, blood vessels, kidney, eye and brain. 6. Reconsideration of the risk of overweight and target body mass index (BMI) in hypertension. 7. Hypertension in young people. 8. Initiation of antihypertensive treatment. More evidence-based criteria and no drug treatment of high normal BP. 9. Target BP for treatment. More evidence-based criteria and unified target systolic blood pressure (SBP) (<140 mmHg) in both higher and lower CV risk patients. 10. Liberal approach to initial monotherapy, without any all-ranking purpose. 11. Revised schema for priorital two-drug combinations. 12. New therapeutic algorithms for achieving target BP. 13. Extended section on therapeutic strategies in special conditions. 14. Revised recommendations on treatment of hypertension in the elderly. 15. Drug treatment of octogenarians. 16. Special attention to resistant hypertension and new treatment approaches. 17. Increased attention to OD-guided therapy. 18. New approaches to chronic management of hypertensive disease

7,018 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
24 Mar 2010-BMJ
TL;DR: This update of the CONSORT statement improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias.
Abstract: Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

5,957 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis with parathyroid hormone decreases the risk of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures; increases vertebral, femoral, and total-body bone mineral density; and is well tolerated.
Abstract: Background Once-daily injections of parathyroid hormone or its amino-terminal fragments increase bone formation and bone mass without causing hypercalcemia, but their effects on fractures are unknown. Methods We randomly assigned 1637 postmenopausal women with prior vertebral fractures to receive 20 or 40 μg of parathyroid hormone (1-34) or placebo, administered subcutaneously by the women daily. We obtained vertebral radiographs at base line and at the end of the study (median duration of observation, 21 months) and performed serial measurements of bone mass by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Results New vertebral fractures occurred in 14 percent of the women in the placebo group and in 5 percent and 4 percent, respectively, of the women in the 20-μg and 40-μg parathyroid hormone groups; the respective relative risks of fracture in the 20-μg and 40-μg groups, as compared with the placebo group, were 0.35 and 0.31 (95 percent confidence intervals, 0.22 to 0.55 and 0.19 to 0.50). New nonvertebral fragili...

4,229 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Consort Statement as mentioned in this paper is a group of scientists and editors developed to improve the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) by providing guidance to authors about how to improve their reporting of their trials.
Abstract: Overwhelming evidence now indicates that the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) is less than optimal. Recent methodologic analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which boast the elimination of systematic error as their primary hallmark. Systematic error in RCTs reflects poor science, and poor science threatens proper ethical standards. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have adopted the CONSORT statement. The CONSORT statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs by providing guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of their trials. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For most items, at least one published example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies are provided. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT statement, this explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated Web site (http://www.consort -statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomized trials.

3,647 citations