ArticleJournal of osteoporosis2010
Revisiting estrogen: efficacy and safety for postmenopausal bone health.
Article in Journal of osteoporosis, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome analysis after cephalomedullary nail implantation in older adults and elderly patients with per-, sub- or intertrochanteric femur fractures.BMC research notes · 2025Article
- Formulation and Evaluation of a Self-Microemulsifying Drug Delivery System of Raloxifene with Improved Solubility and Oral Bioavailability.Pharmaceutics · 2023Article
- Real-world effectiveness of osteoporosis treatments in Germany.Archives of osteoporosis · 2022Observational
- The Effects of Transdermal Estrogen Delivery on Bone Mineral Density in Postmenopausal Women: A Meta-analysis.Iranian journal of pharmaceutical research : IJPR · 2017Article
- Gender differences for initiating teriparatide therapy: baseline data from the Direct Assessment of Nonvertebral Fracture in the Community Experience (DANCE) study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2012Article
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 rapid decline in endogenous estrogen production that occurs during menopause is associated with significant bone loss and increased risk for fragility fracture. While hormone therapy (HT) is an effective means to re-establish endogenous estrogen levels and reduce the risk of future fracture, its use can be accompanied by undesirable side effects such as stroke and breast cancer. In this paper, we revisit the issue of whether HT can be both safe and effective for the prevention of postmenopausal bone loss by examining standard and alternative doses and formulations of HT. The aim of this paper is to continue the dialogue regarding the benefits and controversies of HT with the goal of encouraging the dissemination of-up-to date evidence that may influence how HT is viewed and prescribed.
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.