Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jun 20.
Published in final edited form as: Br J Nutr. 2017 Jun 20;117(11):1570–1576. doi: 10.1017/S0007114517001350

DIETARY MAGNESIUM INTAKE AND FRACTURE RISK: DATA FROM A LARGE PROSPECTIVE STUDY

Nicola Veronese 1,2,*, Brendon Stubbs 3,4,*, Marco Solmi 2,5,6, Marianna Noale 7, Alberto Vaona 8, Jacopo Demurtas 9, Stefania Maggi 7
PMCID: PMC5753403  NIHMSID: NIHMS930643  PMID: 28631583

Abstract

Research considering the relationship between dietary magnesium (Mg) and osteoporosis and fractures are sparse and conflicting. We therefore aimed to investigate Mg intake and the onset of fractures in a large cohort of American men and women involved in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) over a follow-up period of 8 years. Dietary Mg intake (including those derived from supplementation) was evaluated through a food frequency questionnaire at baseline and categorized using gender-specific quintiles; osteoporotic fractures were evaluated through self-reported history. Overall, 3,765 participants (1,577 men; 2,071 women), mean age of 60.6±9.1 years were included. During follow-up, 560 individuals (198 men and 368 women) developed a new fracture. After adjusting for 14 potential confounders at baseline and taking those with lower Mg intake as reference (Q1), men (HR=0.47; 95%CI: 0.21–1.00, p=0.05) and women (HR=0.38; 95%CI: 0.17–0.82, p=0.01) in the highest quintile reported a significant lower risk of fracture. Women meeting the recommended Mg intake were at an 27% decreased risk of future fractures. In conclusion, higher dietary Mg intake has a protective effect on future osteoporotic fractures especially in women with high risk of knee osteoarthritis. Those women meeting the recommended Mg intake appear at lower risk of fractures.

Keywords: magnesium, fractures, osteoporosis, epidemiology

INTRODUCTION

Magnesium (Mg) is the fourth most abundant cation in the body and plays a pivotal role in many of its functions, being involved in more than 300 enzymatic reactions.(1,2)

Several observational studies have demonstrated that low Mg intake is associated with a higher risk of several cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, including coronary artery disease(3), hypertension(4), metabolic syndrome(5), and diabetes.(6)

Although about 60% of total Mg is stored in the bone(7), the role of this cation in bone diseases and osteoporosis is still unclear. In a recent systematic review and meta-analysis, higher dietary Mg intake was not associated with decreased fracture risk in prospective studies.(8) In the largest prospective study included in this meta-analysis(9), the Authors found that Mg intake higher than the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) resulted in a higher risk of fractures, probably related to more physical activity and falls.(9) A similar result was obtained by another large study in Swedish people.(10)

These findings are, however, surprising since in cross-sectional studies there was a significant association between higher Mg intake and bone mineral density (BMD)(8) and the beneficial role of Mg in inflammation(11) and oxidative stress(12), two remarkable risk factors for osteoporosis, is well-known. Moreover, Mg is contained in green vegetables, nuts, cereals and other components of Mediterranean diet that seems to have an important protective effect on bone fractures in women.(13)

Due to these conflicting results, we therefore aimed to investigate the effect of higher Mg intakes on the onset of fractures in a large cohort of American men and women involved in the Osteoarthritis Initiative over a follow-up period of 8 years.

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

Data source and subjects

Data were obtained from subjects enrolled in the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) database, which is available for public access at http://www.oai.ucsf.edu/. Specific datasets used are those recorded during baseline and screening evaluations (V00) and each database reporting data on fractures until 96 months from baseline (V10). All participants in this study were recruited as part of the ongoing, publicly and privately funded, multicenter, and longitudinal OAI study. Patients at high risk of knee OA were recruited from four clinical sites in the US (Baltimore, MD; Pittsburgh, PA; Pawtucket, RI; and Columbus, OH) between February 2004 and May 2006.

All of the participants provided written informed consent. The OAI study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of the OAI Coordinating Center, University of California at San Francisco.

Exposure

Dietary Mg intake was obtained through a food frequency questionnaire recorded during baseline visit of the OAI. Since this questionnaire included data on Mg supplementation, also this intake was calculated. Mg intakes were computed as residuals from the regression model, with total caloric intake as the independent variable (residual method).(14) The entire cohort was divided in quintiles of Mg intake according to gender using 205, 269, 323 and 398 mg/daily for men and 190, 251, 306, and 373 for women.

Outcomes

The presence of fractures at baseline and during follow-up was obtained through self-reported history of fractures at the most common sites, i.e. hip, spine and forearm. Since hip, spine and forearm are the most common sites of osteoporotic fractures, these outcomes were initially evaluated separately although, for convergence problems, analyses for hip (n=44) and spine (n=77) were not reliable.

Covariates

A number of variables were identified from the OAI dataset to explore the relationship between dietary Mg intake and incident fractures. These included: (1) race was defined as “whites” vs. others; (2) smoking habits as “previous/current” vs. never; (3) educational level was categorized as “college” vs. others; (4) yearly income as < or > 50,000 $ and missing data; (5) body mass index (BMI), measured by a trained nurse; (6) co-morbidities assessed through the modified Charlson comorbidity score, with higher scores indicating an increased severity of conditions(15); (7) daily intake of vitamin D, calcium, potassium (from food and from supplements) and total energy intake; and (8) physical activity, evaluated using the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE), a validated scale for assessing physical activity level in the elderly. The scale covers 12 different activities including: walking, sports and housework, and is scored from 0 upwards, without a maximum score.(16) Moreover, data regarding the use of drugs affecting positively bone (teriparatide, bisphosphonates, hormones) were also recorded.

Statistical analyses

Since Mg intake was significantly different between men and women, such as the incidence of fractures during follow-up (p-value<0.0001 for both comparisons), and the interaction between dietary Mg intake and gender in predicting fracture onset at follow-up was significant (p-value for interaction=0.04), all the findings are reported by gender.

For continuous variables, normal distributions were tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The data are shown as means and standard deviations (SD) for quantitative measures, and frequency and percentages for all discrete variables by dietary Mg intake at baseline. For continuous variables, differences between the means of the covariates by quintiles of dietary Mg intake were analyzed using an analysis of covariance (ANOVA); chi-square test was applied for discrete variables. Bonferroni’s correction was used in all the analyses. Levene’s test was used to test the homoscedasticity of variances and, if its assumption was violated, Welch’s ANOVA was used.

Multivariate Cox’s regression models were conducted using as exposure total Mg intake (sum of the Mg from supplements and from foods) at baseline categorized as quintiles and as outcome incident fractures at follow-up. Factors which reached a statistical significance between participants with OA vs. those without or significantly associated with depressive symptomatology at follow-up (taking a p-value<0.05 as statistically significant) were included. Multi-collinearity among covariates was assessed through variance inflaction factor (VIF), taking a cut-off of 2 as reason of exclusion, but no variable was excluded for this reason. Data of Cox’s regression analysis were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A similar analysis was run modelling total Mg intake as continuous variable.

All analyses were performed using the SPSS 21.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois). All statistical tests were two-tailed and statistical significance was assumed for a p-value <0.05.

RESULTS

Study participants

At baseline, among 4,796 potentially eligible individuals, 243 reported data not reliable regarding FFQ (i.e. less than 500 or more than 5,000 Kcal), 788 had a fracture at baseline, and 117 were lost at follow-up (i.e. did not have the first follow-up visit), leaving 3,765 participants eligible for this research.

Baseline analyses

Overall, 3,765 participants (1,577 men; 2,071 women) with a mean age of 60.6±9.1 (range: 45–79) years were eligible for inclusion in the current study. The mean intake of Mg was 295±116 daily, with 53±47 mg derived from oral supplementation. Only the 27.0% of the whole cohort reached correspondent RDA (i.e. 420 mg for men and 320 for women, respectively).(17)

The baseline characteristics by dietary Mg intake and by gender are summarized in the Tables 1 and 2. Independently from gender, those with higher Mg intake were more significantly old, white, consumed a significant higher calorie intake including a higher dietary intake of micronutrients (potassium, calcium, vitamin D), but they consumed a significant lower amount of alcohol than participants with lower Mg intake. Conversely, no significant differences emerged regarding physical activity level and presence of co-morbidities. Finally, men with higher Mg intake were significantly leaner than those consuming less Mg (Table 1). In women, individuals consuming more Mg were also more likely to be prescribed bisphosphonates than those consuming less Mg, although this different did not reach the significance (p=0.06). In the sample as whole, only four participants used teriparatide, which may be due to the fact that people who already had a diagnosis of fractures were excluded.

Table 1.

Participants’ characteristics by baseline magnesium (Mg) intake in men.

Q1
(n=316)
Q2
(n=314)
Q3
(n=316)
Q4
(n=315)
Q5
(n=316)
P
value*
Magnesium from diet (mg/day) 149 (38) 200 (45) 235 (46) 292 (48) 419 (92) <0.0001
Magnesium from supplementation (mg/day) 13 (29) 38 (45) 61 (45) 65 (45) 69 (43) <0.0001
Total magnesium intake (mg/day) 161 (34) 239 (18) 299 (16) 359 (22) 491 (87) <0.0001
Age (years) 60.0 (9.7) 59.3 (9.4) 60.5 (9.4) 62.2 (9.7) 60.9 (9.4) 0.002

Nutritional parameters
Energy intake (Kcal/day) 1059 (320) 1331 (380) 1514 (434) 1744 (463) 2275 (643) <0.0001
Calcium intake (mg/day) 539 (300) 762 (371) 903 (388) 1078 (463) 1372 (506) <0.0001
Potassium (mg/day) 1556 (432) 2076 (513) 2421 (537) 2965 (592) 4059 (974) <0.0001
Vitamin D intake (mg/day) 147 (129) 289 (193) 397 (192) 455 (210) 538 (242) <0.0001
Alcohol intake (% of Kcal/day) 6.8 (9.1) 6.8 (8.2) 6.4 (8.1) 5.8 (6.8) 4.9 (5.7) 0.005
BMI (Kg/m2) 29.2 (4.3) 29.2 (3.9) 28.7 (4.1) 28.4 (4.0) 28.6 (4.2) 0.05

Demographics
White race (n, %) 239 (76) 265 (84) 286 (91) 272 (87) 265 (84) 0.005
Smoking (previous/current, n%) 159 (51) 165 (53) 154 (49) 160 (51) 163 (52) 1.00
College (n, %) 118 (37) 120 (38) 112 (36) 116 (37) 112 (35) 0.56
Yearly income (<50,000 $, n, %) 207 (68) 231 (75) 230 (74) 224 (73) 218 (70) 0.69
PASE (points) 171 (84) 182 (79) 174 (89) 174 (88) 186 (94) 0.13

Medical conditions and medications
Charlson co-morbidity score 0.43 (0.89) 0.41 (0.90) 0.41 (0.89) 0.42 (0.93) 0.43 (0.98) 1.00
Hormones (n, %) 2 (0.6) 4 (1.3) 6 (1.9) 7 (2.2) 4 (1.3) 0.30
Bisphosphonates (n, %) 2 (0.6) 7 (2.2) 3 (1.0) 7 (2.2) 5 (1.6) 0.38

Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; PASE: Physical activity Scale for Elderly.

*

P values were calculated using the Analysis of Variance for continuous and chi-square test for categorical ones, respectively. Bonferroni’s correction was applied for all comparisons.

Data are means (with standard deviation) or number (and percentage) as appropriate.

Table 2.

Participants’ characteristics by baseline magnesium (Mg) intake in women.

Q1
(n=414)
Q2
(n=411)
Q3
(n=421)
Q4
(n=414)
Q5
(n=411)
P
value*
Magnesium from diet (mg/day) 134 (34) 179 (46) 207 (43) 262 (42) 371 (45) <0.0001
Magnesium from supplementation (mg/day) 9 (23) 43 (46) 71 (41) 45 (40) 83 (35) <0.0001
Total magnesium intake (mg/day) 144 (34) 225 (17) 281 (15) 338 (19) 454 (76) <0.0001
Age (years) 59.2 (8.7) 60.0 (8.9) 61.4 (8.7) 61.1 (8.9) 61.3 (8.9) 0.01

Nutritional parameters
Energy intake (Kcal/day) 897 (263) 1089 (361) 1192 (352) 1427 (402) 1803 (537) <0.0001
Calcium intake (mg/day) 771 (465) 1036 (479) 1266 (460) 1477 (497) 1722 (547) <0.0001
Potassium (mg/day) 1408 (400) 4867 (517) 2145 (492) 2675 (542) 3689 (833) <0.0001
Vitamin D intake (mg/day) 164 (137) 336 (199) 476 (198) 536 (202) 631 (207) <0.0001
Alcohol intake (g/day) 4.1 (7.1) 3.8 (6.4) 3.8 (5.7) 3.5 (5.7) 2.7 (4.4) 0.007
BMI (Kg/m2) 29.0 (5.2) 28.7 (5.2) 28.7 (5.69 28.3 (5.2) 28.3 (5.2) 0.28

Demographics
White race (n, %) 284 (69) 294 (72) 322 (77) 329 (80) 315 (77) <0.0001
Smoking (previous/current, n%) 218 (53) 236 (28) 235 (56) 225 (55) 226 (55) 0.79
College (n, %) 100 (24) 101 (25) 108 (26) 104 (25) 109 (27) 0.44
Yearly income (<50,000 $, n, %) 206 (52) 212 (54) 226 (56) 234 (59) 210 (54) 0.29
PASE (points) 147 (76) 155 (747) 152 (78) 157 (79) 155 (76) 0.37

Medical conditions and medications
Charlson co-morbidity score 0.36 (0.89) 0.37 (0.82) 0.35 (0.76) 0.35 (0.74) 0.35 (0.71) 0.99
Hormones (n, %) 5 (1.4) 7 (2.0) 8 (2.2) 11 (2.9) 6 (1.7) 0.47
Bisphosphonates (n, %) 54 (13.1) 61 (14.8) 86 (20.5) 73 (17.7) 76 (18.6) 0.06

Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; PASE: Physical activity Scale for Elderly.

*

P values were calculated using the Analysis of Variance for continuous and chi-square test for categorical ones, respectively. Bonferroni’s correction was applied for all comparisons.

Data are means (with standard deviation) or number (and percentage) as appropriate.

Follow-up analyses and incident fractures onset

After a mean period of 6.2 years, 560 individuals (198 men and 362 women) developed a new fracture. As shown in Table 3, men (Q5: 20; 95%CI: 13–27 vs. Q1: 27; 95%CI: 18–36; Figure 1a) and women (Q5: 27; 95%CI: 20–34 vs. Q1: 31; 95%CI: 23–39; Figure 1b) with higher Mg intake reported a significant lower incidence of fractures compared to those with lower Mg intake.

Table 3.

Association between baseline magnesium (Mg) intake and incident fracture.

Men Women

Mg intake Cases Subjects Incidence
rate
HR*
(95%CI)
p-value
Cases Subjects Incidence
rate
HR
(95%CI)
p-value
Q1 42 316 27 (18–36) 1 [ref.] 78 414 31 (23–39) 1 [ref.]
Q2 26 314 13 (9–18) 0.53 (0.31–0.90) P=0.02 73 411 30 (22–38) 0.77 (0.52–1.14) P=0.20
Q3 34 316 18 (10–25) 0.56 (0.33–0.97) P=0.04 74 421 28 (20–36) 0.62 (0.39–0.99) 0.05
Q4 44 315 22 (15–29) 0.65 (0.36–1.17) P=0.15 76 414 36 (25–47) 0.56 (0.32–0.98) P=0.04
Q5 52 316 20 (13–27) 0.47 (0.21–1.00) P=0.05 61 411 27 (20–34) 0.38 (0.17–0.82) P=0.01

Data are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with correspondent 95% confidence intervals (CI).

*

Fully adjusted hazard ratios included as covariates: age (as continuous); total energy intake (in Kcal, as continuous); race (white vs. others); body mass index (as continuous); education (college vs. others); smoking habits (current vs. previous/never); yearly income (≥ vs. <50,000 $); Charlson co-morbidity index; use of drugs affecting positively bone (bisphosphonates, hormones, teriparatide); calcium intake (mg/day); potassium (mg/day); vitamin D intake (mg/day); alcohol intake (% of total energy intake); physical activity scale for the elderly (as continuous).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Cumulative risk of any fracture at follow-up by magnesium (Mg) intake at baseline in men (a) and women (b).

After adjusting for 14 potential confounders at baseline and taking those with lower Mg intake as reference (i.e. those in Q1), men (HR=0.47; 95%CI: 0.21–1.00, p=0.05) and women (HR=0.38; 95%CI: 0.17–0.82, p=0.01) in the fifth quintile reported a significant lower risk of fracture (Table 3). Since height is a better predictor than BMI in predicting fractures(18), in a secondary analysis we introduced height in the fully-adjusted model. Compared to subjects with lower Mg intake, men in the fifth quintile reported a non-significant association with incident fractures (HR=0.75; 95%CI: 0.45–1.25, p=0.75), whilst women with the highest Mg intake reported a significant reduced risk of fractures (HR=0.47; 95%CI: 0.33–0.68, p<0.0001).

When divided by RDA, only women reaching the RDA for Mg had a significant reduction in fracture risk of 27% (95%CI: 0.51–0.98, p=0.04).

On the contrary, total Mg intake modelled as continuous variable, was not associated with any decreased risk of having fracture at follow-up (for 10 mg increase in Mg intake: HR=1.00; 95%CI: 0.97–1.03; p=0.99 in men and HR=0.99; 95%CI: 0.96–1.02; p=0.55 in women).

DISCUSSION

In this study, higher dietary Mg intake was associated with a significant reduction in fracture risk over 8 year of follow-up. Those having the highest Mg intake, in fact, reported a significant reduction of 53% in fracture risk in men and of 62% in women, after adjusting for 14 potential baseline confounders. However, the association between Mg intake and the onset of fractures seems to be stronger in women since, for example, only women reaching the RDA reported a significant lower risk of fractures and only in women, after adjusting for height, the association between Mg intake and fractures remains significant.

As shown at baseline, the prevalence of low Mg intake is very high, since only a quarter of the participants of OAI reported sufficient intake of Mg. These data are in line with other researches showing a prevalence of Mg intakes lower than RDA reaching the 75%.(19,20) Low Mg intake seems to predispose people to several medical conditions including including metabolic(5,6), cardiovascular(3,4) and musculoskeletal diseases (e.g. sarcopenia).(21)

Conversely, the data about Mg intake and fracture/osteoporosis risk are less clear. As mentioned in the Introduction several studies and a recent meta-analysis reported contrasting findings on the association between Mg intake and fractures.(9,10) Our research is, to the best of our knowledge, the first reporting a clear and significant association between higher Mg intake and reduction in fractures in both genders.

Several explanations support a role for Mg in preventing osteoporosis and fractures. First, Mg seems to be of relevance in bone health, positively affecting the function of osteoblasts and osteoclasts, and modulating calcium homeostasis, through a regulation of calcitriol and parathyroid hormone.(22) Moreover, Mg stabilizes amorphous calcium phosphate slowing its transformation to hydroxyapatite(23), making bones stronger. In osteoporotic women, low Mg and high hydroxyapatite contents have been more commonly shown in the trabecular bone.(24)

Other effects, however, could contribute to the positive role of Mg on bone. First, Mg has an anti-inflammatory action(25) and inflammation is chronic condition leading to osteoporosis and fractures.(26) Second, Mg seems to be an essential element to support muscular strength(21,27) and consequently reduce the risk of falls and finally fractures.

The effect of Mg on fractures was more important in women than in men. It is known that women, particularly after menopause, have decreased intake of micronutrients than men(28) making them more sensitive to the consequences of nutritional deficiencies. Curiously, the other investigations regarding Mg and fractures were made in women, whilst the data in men are reported only by two studies showing no association between Mg and intake and fractures.(29,30) More research is, however, needed to understand why in men the association between Mg and fractures is less consistent.

The findings of our study should be interpreted within its limitations. First, dietary Mg intake was estimated only at baseline. Therefore, we cannot know if the changes in dietary patterns could affect our results. Second, the information regarding fractures and other medical conditions were only self-reported. Even if several studies(31,32) reported that for major osteoporotic fractures the accuracy of self-reported fractures is accurate as radiological records, we cannot exclude an underestimation of some non-clinical fractures, such as vertebral ones. Third, no data about BMD assessments are available and this could be introduce another bias in our findings. Fourth, we were not able to run analyses for specific fracture site due to a likely lack of power for these analyses. Finally, the OAI included participants with knee osteoarthritis or at high risk of this condition. Thus, a selection bias cannot be excluded and the generalizability of our findings in other contexts should be verified. Conversely, among the strengths of our work, we can include the large sample size of men and women and the long follow-up of observation.

In conclusion, higher dietary Mg intake has a protective effect on bone osteoporotic fractures, particularly in women, suggesting an important role of this mineral in osteoporosis and fractures. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to understand the possible role of Mg in delaying fractures.

Acknowledgments

Funding sources: The OAI is a public-private partnership comprised of five contracts(N01-AR-2-2258; N01-AR-2-2259; N01-AR-2-2260; N01-AR-2-2261; N01-AR-2-2262) funded by the National Institutes of Health, a branch of the Department of Health and Human Services, and conducted by the OAI Study Investigators. Private funding partners include Merck Research Laboratories; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline; and Pfizer, Inc. Private sector funding for the OAI is managed by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. This manuscript was prepared using an OAI public use data set and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the OAI investigators, the NIH, or the private funding partners.

Sponsors’ role: The sponsors had no role in the design, methods, subject recruitment, data collection, analysis or preparation of this paper.

Footnotes

Conflict of interest: none.

Authors’ role: Veronese: data analysis; Stubbs: writing the manuscript; Solmi: writing the manuscript; Noale: data analysis; Vaona: revision of the manuscript; Demurtas: writing the paper; Maggi: revision of the manuscript. All the authors approved the final version of this manuscript.

References

  • 1.Swaminathan R. Magnesium metabolism and its disorders. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 2003;24:47–66. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Veronese N, Zanforlini BM, Manzato E, et al. Magnesium and healthy aging. Magnes. Res. 2015;28:112–115. doi: 10.1684/mrh.2015.0387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Del Gobbo LC, Imamura F, Wu JHY, et al. Circulating and dietary magnesium and risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2013;98:160–73. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.112.053132. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mizushima S, Cappuccio FP, Nichols R, et al. Dietary magnesium intake and blood pressure: a qualitative overview of the observational studies. J. Hum. Hypertens. 1998;12:447–53. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1000641. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Sarrafzadegan N, Khosravi-Boroujeni H, Lotfizadeh M, et al. Magnesium status and the metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrition. 2016;32:409–17. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2015.09.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Dong J-Y, Xun P, He K, et al. Magnesium intake and risk of type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:2116–22. doi: 10.2337/dc11-0518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Castiglioni S, Cazzaniga A, Albisetti W, et al. Magnesium and osteoporosis: Current state of knowledge and future research directions. Nutrients. 2013:3022–3033. doi: 10.3390/nu5083022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Farsinejad-Marj M, Saneei P, Esmaillzadeh A. Dietary magnesium intake, bone mineral density and risk of fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos. Int. 2016:1389–1399. doi: 10.1007/s00198-015-3400-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Orchard TS, Larson JC, Alghothani N, et al. Magnesium intake, bone mineral density, and fractures: Results from the Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2014;99:926–933. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.067488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Michaelsson K, Holmberg L, Mallmin H, et al. Diet and hip fracture risk: a case-control study. Study Group of the Multiple Risk Survey on Swedish Women for Eating Assessment. Int. J. Epidemiol. 1995;24:771–782. doi: 10.1093/ije/24.4.771. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Dibaba DT, Xun P, He K. Dietary magnesium intake is inversely associated with serum C-reactive protein levels: meta-analysis and systematic review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2014;aop:3007. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2014.7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Hasebe N. Oxidative stress and magnesium. Clin. Calcium. 2005;15:194–202. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Haring B, Crandall CJ, Wu C, et al. Dietary Patterns and Fractures in Postmenopausal Women. JAMA Intern. Med. 2016 doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0482. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Willett WC, Howe GR, Kushi L. Adjustment for total energy intake in epidemiologic studies. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1997;65:1220S–1228S. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/65.4.1220S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Katz JN, Chang LC, Sangha O, et al. Can comorbidity be measured by questionnaire rather than medical record review? Med. Care. 1996;34:73–84. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199601000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Washburn RA, McAuley E, Katula J, et al. The physical activity scale for the elderly (PASE): evidence for validity. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1999;52:643–51. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(99)00049-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Food And Nutrition Board & Institue Of Medicine. Dietary Reference Intakes for Calcium, Phosphorus, Magnesium, Vitamin D, and Fluoride. 1997 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Moayyeri A, Luben RN, Bingham SA, et al. Measured Height Loss Predicts Fractures in Middle-Aged and Older Men and Women: The EPIC-Norfolk Prospective Population Study. J. Bone Miner. Res. 2007;23:425–432. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.071106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Beer-Borst S, Hercberg S, Morabia a, et al. Dietary patterns in six european populations: results from EURALIM, a collaborative European data harmonization and information campaign. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2000;54:253–62. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1600934. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Galan P, Preziosi P, Durlach V, et al. Dietary magnesium intake in a French adult population. Magnes. Res. 1997;10:321–328. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Veronese N, Berton L, Carraro S, et al. Effect of oral magnesium supplementation on physical performance in healthy elderly women involved in a weekly exercise program: a randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2014;100:974–81. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.080168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Nieves JW. Bone. Maximizing bone health--magnesium, BMD and fractures. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 2014;10:255–6. doi: 10.1038/nrendo.2014.39. Nature Publishing Group. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Blumenthal NC, Betts F, Posner aS. Stabilization of amorphous calcium phosphate by Mg and ATP. Calcif. Tissue Int. 1977;23:245–250. doi: 10.1007/BF02012793. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Manicourt DH, Orloff S, Brauman J, et al. Bone mineral content of the radius: good correlations with physicochemical determinations in iliac crest trabecular bone of normal and osteoporotic subjects. Metabolism. 1981;30:57–62. doi: 10.1016/0026-0495(81)90219-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Nielsen FH. Effects of magnesium depletion on inflammation in chronic disease. Curr. Opin. Clin. Nutr. Metab. Care. 2014;17:525–30. doi: 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000093. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Loi F, Córdova LA, Pajarinen J, et al. Inflammation, fracture and bone repair. Bone. 2016:119–130. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2016.02.020. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Dominguez LJ, Barbagallo M, Lauretani F, et al. Magnesium and muscle performance in older persons: The InCHIANTI study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2006;84:419–426. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/84.1.419. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Bolzetta F, Veronese N, De Rui M, et al. Are the Recommended Dietary Allowances for Vitamins Appropriate for Elderly People? J. Acad. Nutr. Diet. 2015 doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2015.04.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hayhoe RPG, Lentjes MAH, Luben RN, et al. Dietary magnesium and potassium intakes and circulating magnesium are associated with heel bone ultrasound attenuation and osteoporotic fracture risk in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort study. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2015;102:376–384. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.114.102723. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Key TJ, Appleby PN, Spencer EA, et al. Calcium, diet and fracture risk: a prospective study of 1898 incident fractures among 34 696 British women and men. Public Health Nutr. 2007;10:1314–20. doi: 10.1017/S1368980007696402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Ivers RQ, Cumming RG, Mitchell P, et al. The accuracy of self-reported fractures in older people. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2002;55:452–457. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(01)00518-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Øyen J, Torstveit MK, Sundgot-Borgen J. Self-reported versus diagnosed stress fractures in Norwegian female elite athletes. J. Sport. Sci. Med. 2009;8:130–135. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES