Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15549501›Full record

ArticleClinical rheumatology2005

Development and validation of the osteoporosis prescreening risk assessment (OPERA) tool to facilitate identification of women likely to have low bone density.

Fausto Salaffi, Ferdinando Silveri, Andrea Stancati, Walter Grassi

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. A comprehensive evaluation of seven osteoporosis screening tools.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Development and validation of a tool for identifying women with low bone mineral density and low-impact fractures: the São Paulo Osteoporosis Risk Index (SAPORI).Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2012
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Selecting men for bone densitometry: performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools in Portuguese men.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2010
    Article
  15. Validation of the Dutch guidelines for dual X-ray absorptiometry measurement.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Fausto SalaffiCattedra di Reumatologia, Università Politecnica delle Marche Ospedale A. Murri, Via dei Colli, 52, 60035, Jesi (AN), Italy. fsalaff@tin.it
Ferdinando Silveri
Andrea Stancati
Walter Grassi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis and its consequent increase in fracture risk is a major health concern for postmenopausal women and older men and has the potential to reach epidemic proportions. The "gold standard" for osteoporosis diagnosis is bone densitometry. However, economic issues or availability of the technology may prevent the possibility of mass screening. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a clinical scoring index designed as a prescreening tool to help clinicians identify which women are at increased risk of osteoporosis [bone mineral density (BMD) T-score -2.5 or less] and should therefore undergo further testing with bone densitometry. Records were analyzed for 1522 postmenopausal females over 50 years of age who had undergone testing with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Osteoporosis risk index scores were compared to bone density T-scores. Hologic QDR 4500 technology was used to measure BMD at the femoral neck and lumbar spine (L1-L4). Participants who had a previous diagnosis of osteoporosis or were taking bone-active medication were excluded. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to identify the specific cutpoint value that would identify women at increased risk of low BMD. A simple algorithm based on age, weight, history of previous low impact fracture, early menopause, and corticosteroid therapy was developed. Validation of this five-item osteoporosis prescreening risk assessment (OPERA) index showed that the tool, at the recommended threshold (or cutoff value) of two, had a sensitivity that ranged from 88.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) for the mean: 86.2-91.9%] at the femoral neck to 90% (95% CI for the mean: 86.1-93.1%) at the lumbar spine area. Corresponding specificity values were 60.6 (95% CI for the mean: 57.9-63.3%) and 64.2% (95% CI for the mean: 61.4-66.9%), respectively. The positive predictive value (PPV) ranged from 29 at the femoral neck to 39.2% at the lumbar spine, while the corresponding negative predictive values (NPVs) reached 96.5 and 96.2%, respectively. Based on this cutoff value, the area under the ROC curve was 0.866 (95% CI for the mean: 0.847-0.882) for the lumbar spine and 0.814 (95% CI for the mean: 0.793-0.833) for the femoral neck. We conclude that the OPERA is a free and effective method for identifying Italian postmenopausal women at increased risk of osteoporosis. Its use could facilitate the appropriate and more cost-effective use of bone densitometry in developing countries.

Indexed as

Bone DensityPatient SelectionAbsorptiometry, PhotonFemaleFemur NeckHumansItalyLumbar VertebraeMass ScreeningMiddle AgedOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentROC CurveSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.