Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20425091›Full record

ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2010

Is osteoporosis disease management cost effective?

Richard Dell, Denise Greene

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Clinician's Guide to Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2014
    Guideline
  2. Efficiency of coordinator-based osteoporosis intervention in fragility fracture patients: a prospective randomized trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2021
    Trial
  3. Post-fracture care: do we need to educate patients rather than doctors? The PREVOST randomized controlled trial.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Association between vertebral bone quality score and residual back pain following percutaneous vertebroplasty for osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Design of a Computer Model for the Identification of Adolescent Swimmers at Risk of Low BMD.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Estimated Direct Medical Cost of Osteoporosis in Saudi Arabia: A Single-Center Retrospective Cost Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  15. Addition of a fracture risk assessment to a coordinator's role improved treatment rates within 6 months of screening in a fragility fracture screening program.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Article
  16. High-risk osteoporosis clinic (HiROC): improving osteoporosis and postfracture care with an organized, programmatic approach.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015
    Article
  17. Osteoporosis in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.Clinical medicine insights. Circulatory, respiratory and pulmonary medicine · 2015
    Review
  18. Atypical femur fractures: a review.Current osteoporosis reports · 2014
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Richard DellKaiser Downey, 9353 East Imperial Highway, Downey, CA 90242, USA. Richard.M.Dell@kp.org
Denise Greene

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Can osteoporosis disease management be cost effective? To answer that question, we conducted an extensive review of osteoporosis and fragility fracture prevention literature in peer-reviewed scientific journals and evidence-based guidelines from professional societies and government health organizations. We explored different strategies suggested by the literature to find how programs can be structured to be cost effective and to decrease fracture rates. We focused on ways to cost effectively identify, risk stratify, treat, and then track patients at risk for osteoporosis and fragility fractures. Studies have shown that osteoporosis management can decrease the hip fracture rate by 25% to 50% and be cost effective at the same time.

Indexed as

Controlled Clinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisHip FracturesHumansOsteoporosisRisk Assessment

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.