ArticleClinical rheumatology2007
Osteoporosis in men: are we referring enough for DXA and how?
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone health nutrition issues in aging.Nutrients · 2010Pooled it
- Approach in glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis prevention: results from the Italian multicenter observational EGEO study.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2013Article
- Testing and treatment for osteoporosis following hip fracture in an integrated U.S. healthcare delivery system.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2011Article
- 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 · 2010Article
- Lack of biochemical hypogonadism in elderly Arab males with low bone mineral density disease.Rheumatology international · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study is to determine the pattern of male referrals to an osteodensitometry unit in a tertiary hospital in UAE. In this study, we reviewed the records of male patients referred for dual X-ray absorptiometry over 9 months since the establishment of the unit. Indications for scanning were categorized into high and medium risk and infrequent causes of osteopenia/osteoporosis. They were ranked according to frequency. The outcome was documented by category and patients were considered normal when they have bone mineral densities (BMD) over 0.82 g/cm(2), osteopenia between 0.60 and 0.82 g/cm(2), and osteoporosis below 0.60 g/cm(2) for hips and lumbar spine. The site with the lowest value was taken as representative of the patient's BMD status. The ages of the patients ranged from 16 to 91 years (mean of 55.2 years). Male referrals made up 8.8% (71/805) over the 9-month period. The number of indications was 83 accounting for 1.16 per patient. Most common reasons were patients on corticosteroid therapy (20.5%), bone rarefaction on radiographs (13%), and fragility fractures (12%). Others included back pain, general aches and pains, querying osteoporosis, and miscellaneous causes that made up 8.5% each. These were followed by immobilization, (6%) arthropathies (6%), excess alcohol intake (3.5%), aging, (2.5%), and hepatorenal disorders (2.5%). A positive family history of osteoporosis, treatment for neoplasia, smoking, and chronic obstructive airway disease (1% each) were the least common reasons for referral. Thirty-five patients (49%) had osteopenia, 16 (22.5%) had osteoporosis, and 20 (28%) were normal. The low referral rate and relatively high normal outcome among men suggest that osteoporosis is still viewed as a disease of females. This aberrant referral pattern, when viewing the majority of indications, reflects an inability to prioritize the reasons for referral. It is prudent, therefore, to instill an awareness of the increasing importance of osteoporosis in men in the minds of the referring clinicians.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.