Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21533288›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2011

Why do women reject bisphosphonates for osteoporosis? A videographic study.

Elizabeth A Scoville, Paula Ponce de Leon Lovaton, Nilay D Shah, Laurie J Pencille, Victor M Montori

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Quality and effectiveness of osteoporosis treatment decision aids: a systematic review and environmental scan.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending Fracture Liaison Services.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Development and usability of a decision aid to initiate anti-osteoporosis medication treatment in patients visiting the fracture liaison service with a recent fracture.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. The 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 · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Systematic scoping review of patients' perceived needs of health services for osteoporosis.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
  14. The development of a personalized patient education tool for decision making for postmenopausal women with osteoporosis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Primary non-adherence to bisphosphonates in an integrated healthcare setting.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013
    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

5 authors.

Elizabeth A ScovilleMayo Medical School, Rochester, Minnesota, United States of America.
Paula Ponce de Leon Lovaton
Nilay D Shah
Laurie J Pencille
Victor M Montori

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite access to effective, safe, and affordable treatment for osteoporosis, at-risk women may choose not to start bisphosphonate therapy. Understanding the reasons women give for rejecting a clinician's offer of treatment during consultations and how clinician's react to these reasons may help clinicians develop more effective strategies for fracture prevention and medication adherence.

methodsWe conducted a videographic evaluation of encounters in the Osteoporosis Choice randomized trial of a decision aid about bisphosphonates vs. usual primary care. Eligible videos involved consultations with women with an estimated 10-year fragility fracture risk >20% who verbalized at least one reason to not take bisphosphonates. Two reviewers independently reviewed eligible videos and verbatim transcripts, classifying patient views about bisphosphonate use, clinicians response to those views, and patient adherence at 6 months post visit.

resultsEighteen video recordings (12 with decision aid) were eligible for analyses. We identified 37 reasons for and against bisphosphonate therapy. Eleven patients rejected treatment, offering 9 (average of 2 per patient) unique reasons against initiating bisphosphonates (most common: side effects 39% and distrust of medications in general 33%). When physicians conceded to patient views the outcome was no bisphosphonate use. Adherence to choices at 6 months was 100%.

conclusionsThe expression of patient preferences is sometimes unfavorable to bisphosphonates treatment even among well-informed patients at high risk for osteoporotic fractures. At 6 months, patients who expressed concerns about these medicines behaved consistently with the decision made during the visit.

Indexed as

Patient Acceptance of Health CareAdultBone Density Conservation AgentsDecision MakingDiphosphonatesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosisPatient ComplianceBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonates

Identifiers

PMID21533288
PMCPMC3076371

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.