Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21847749›Full record

ReviewSkeletal radiology2011

Bisphosphonates in the treatment of osteoporosis: a review of their contribution and controversies.

Ian R Reid

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Skeletal radiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

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

  1. Efficacy of statins for osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Clinical role of bisphosphonate therapy.International journal of women's health · 2012
    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

1 author.

Ian R ReidFaculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland Auckland, New Zealand. i.reid@auckland.ac.nz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The bisphosphonates have revolutionized the therapy of osteoporosis, particularly the prevention of vertebral and hip fractures. The development of tools for defining absolute fracture risk facilitates their targeting to appropriate, at-risk individuals. Prescribers need to be aware of their common side effects (gastrointestinal intolerance with oral dosing and flu-like illness following intravenous use). Whether these agents carry a real risk of other problems such as osteonecrosis of the jaw and subtrochanteric fractures remains uncertain at the present time. If the association of these problems with bisphosphonates is real, it is important that the major therapeutic benefits that can accrue from bisphosphonates' appropriate targeted use are not lost as a result of the anxiety concerning these extremely rare adverse events.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationBisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the JawBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesEsophageal NeoplasmsFractures, BoneHumansOsteoporosisTreatment OutcomeBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonates

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.