Older couple cooking

Women's Health Testing

Bone Mineral Density Screening

Being female puts you at risk of developing osteoporosis.1


  • Of the estimated 10 million Americans with osteoporosis, about eight million or 80% are women
  • Approximately one in two women over age 50 will break a bone because of osteoporosis
  • A women’s risk of breaking a hip is equal to her combined risk of breast, uterine and ovarian cancer
supporting image

ACOG guidelines2 recommend bone density should be screened in postmenopausal women younger than 65 years if any of the following risk factors are noted:

  • Medical history of a fragility fracture
  • Body weight less than 127 lb.
  • Medical causes of bone loss (medications or diseases)
  • Parental medical history of hip fracture
  • Current smoker
  • Alcoholism
  • Rheumatoid arthritis

Vitamin D and Bone Health

For many years, clinicians have been aware of the link between vitamin D levels and bone health. In one study3 the authors correlated total hip bone mineral density by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry to measured total vitamin D levels in 13,432 subjects enrolled in the NHANES III study. Their statistical analysis took into account sex, age, estrogen use and race/ethnicity. The authors observed a significant positive association between serum vitamin D levels and measured bone mineral density.

Labcorp offers several vitamin D tests that may be useful in certain clinical applications.


  1. National Osteoporosis Foundation. What women need to know. Accessed August 8, 2019. Available at https://www.nof.org/preventing-fractures/general-facts/what-women-need-t...
  2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Well Women Recommendations. High-Risk Factors. Available at: https://www.acog.org/About-ACOG/ACOG-Departments/Annual-Womens-Health-Ca...
  3. Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Dietrich T, Orav EJ, Dawson-Hughes B. Positive association between 25-hydroxy vitamin D levels and bone mineral density: a population-based study of younger and older adults. Am J Med. 2004 May 1; 116(9):634-639