ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2008
Clinical performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools in women aged 67 years and older.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Risk Assessment Tools for Osteoporosis Screening in Postmenopausal Women: A Systematic Review.Current osteoporosis reports · 2015Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of the performance of clinical risk assessment instruments for screening for osteoporosis or low bone density.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015Pooled it
- Identifying Younger Postmenopausal Women With Osteoporosis Using USPSTF-Recommended Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Tools.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- A novel primary osteoporosis screening tool (POST) for adults aged 50 years and over.Endocrine · 2023Article
- Clinical performance of seven prescreening tools for osteoporosis in Iranian postmenopausal women.Rheumatology international · 2015Article
- Development and validation of osteoporosis prescreening model for Iranian postmenopausal women.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2015Article
- Comparison of three different osteoporosis risk assessment tools: ORAI (osteoporosis risk assessment instrument), SCORE (simple calculated osteoporosis risk estimation) and OST (osteoporosis self-assessment tool).Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2014Article
- Comparison between various fracture risk assessment tools.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2014Review
- Cost-effectiveness of bone densitometry among Caucasian women and men without a prior fracture according to age and body weight.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013Article
- Weight and body mass index predict bone mineral density and fractures in women aged 40 to 59 years.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2009Article
- Elevated bone mass: a weighty matter?Skeletal radiology · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
unlabelledClinical performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools was studied in women aged 67 years and older. Weight was as accurate as two of the tools to detect low bone density. Discriminatory ability was slightly better for the OST risk tool, which is based only on age and weight.
introductionScreening performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools has not been tested in a large, population-based US cohort.
methodsWe conducted a diagnostic accuracy analysis of the Osteoporosis Self-assessment Tool (OST), Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI), Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation (SCORE), and individual risk factors (age, weight or prior fracture) to identify low central (hip and lumbar spine) bone mineral density (BMD) in 7779 US women aged 67 years and older participating in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures.
resultsThe OST had the greatest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.74, 0.77). Weight had an AUC of 0.73 (95% CI 0.72, 0.75), which was >or=AUC values for the ORAI, SCORE, age or prior fracture. Using cut points from the development papers, the risk tools had sensitivities >or=85% and specificities <or=48%. When new cut points were set to achieve a likelihood ratio of negative 0.1-0.2, the tools ruled out fewer than 1/4 of women without low central BMD.
conclusionsWeight identified low central BMD as accurately as the ORAI and SCORE. The risk tools would be unlikely to show an advantage over simple weight cut points in an osteoporosis screening protocol for elderly women.
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.