ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2011
Oral contraceptive use and bone.
Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 2011. 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.
- Causal Effects of Female Reproductive and Hormonal Factors on Osteoporosis, Bone Mineral Density, and Osteoarthritis: A Two-Sample Mendelian Randomization Study.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
- Hormonal Contraception and Bone Metabolism: Emerging Evidence from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies on Post-Pubertal and Reproductive-Age Women.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Premenopausal Osteoporosis.Endocrinology and metabolism clinics of North America · 2017Review
- Evaluation and management of the premenopausal woman with low BMD.Current osteoporosis reports · 2013Article
- Reference intervals for serum osteocalcin concentrations in adult men and women from the study of health in Pomerania.BMC endocrine disorders · 2013Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sex hormones play a key role in bone homeostasis, and oral contraceptive (OC) use may affect bone mass in women. However, the nature of the association between OC use and bone remains controversial. This paper critically reviews studies on OC use and bone published between January 2009 and August 2010. Studies of OC use and bone mass mainly focus on adolescents or young adults and showed mixed results. Weak evidence suggests that OC use has no effect or a beneficial effect on bone mass, except in women commencing OCs shortly after menarche, and a consistently negative effect on bone turnover markers. A limited number of studies have examined the effect of ultra-low-dose OC (20 μg ethinyl estradiol) on bone mass in adolescents or young adults, and present conflicting results. The lack of randomized trials indicates that further high-quality prospective studies are required to investigate the effect of OC use on bone mass, particularly the optimal dose and timing of initiation of OC use in adolescents requiring contraception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21104044What 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.