Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21852066›Full record

GuidelineCanadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes2011

Osteoporosis Canada 2010 guidelines for the assessment of fracture risk.

Brian Lentle, Angela M Cheung, David A Hanley, William D Leslie, David Lyons, Alexandra Papaioannou, Stephanie Atkinson, Jacques P Brown, Sidney Feldman, Anthony B Hodsman and 7 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 34 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

34 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. The Lebanese GRADE-based vitamin D guidelines: a paradigm for the MENA region.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Quality of fracture risk assessment in post-fracture care in Ontario, Canada.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2013
    Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Geographic variation in bone mineral density and prevalent fractures in the Canadian longitudinal study on aging.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. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. The association of objectively ascertained sibling fracture history with major osteoporotic fractures: a population-based cohort study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A pragmatic proposal for triaging DXA testing during the COVID-19 global pandemic.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Equal treatment: no evidence of gender inequity in osteoporosis management in a coordinator-based 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
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Brian LentleDepartment of Radiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. blentle@shaw.ca
Angela M Cheung
David A Hanley
William D Leslie
David Lyons
Alexandra Papaioannou
Stephanie Atkinson
Jacques P Brown
Sidney Feldman
Anthony B Hodsman
Abida Sophina Jamal
Robert G Josse
Stephanie M Kaiser
Brent Kvern
Suzanne Morin
Kerry Siminoski
Scientific Advisory Council of Osteoporosis Canada

Funding

CIHR 88225-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis Canada's 2010 Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis in Canada focus on the clinical impact of fragility fractures, and on the assessment and management of women and men at high risk for fragility fracture. These guidelines now integrate a 10-year absolute fracture risk prediction into an overall management approach by using validated risk assessment tools. There currently is a large gap between optimal practices and those that are now being provided to Canadians with osteoporosis. These guidelines are part of a concerted effort to close this gap. Key changes from the 2002 guidelines of interest and relevance to radiologists are highlighted in this report.

Indexed as

Risk AssessmentBone DensityCanadaFemaleFractures, BoneHumansMaleOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID21852066
PMCPMC5101067

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.