Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21956551›Full record

ReviewWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2012

[Diagnosis of osteoporosis in geriatric patients - possibilities and limitations].

Peter Mikosch

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [Osteoporosis and multimorbidity].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2019
    Review
  3. [Management of osteoporosis after fragility fractures].Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie · 2018
    Review
  4. [Osteoporosis: therapy in interface management].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2013
    Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peter Mikosch1. Medizinische Abteilung, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria. peter.mikosch@wgkk.at
Klinikum Klagenfurt · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteoporosis with its increased risk of low-trauma fractures has to be regarded as a disorder with significant influence on quality of life, increased morbidity and mortality in the elderly. Therapies of osteoporosis, in particular drug therapies aiming to reduce the fracture risk, are in general only initiated after diagnostic procedures prior to the start of osteoporosis therapy. Consequently, diagnosis of osteoporosis plays a key role in optimized patient care and management. Medical history, physical examination, planar X-ray, osteodensitometry and a range of laboratory parameters make up the key steps in the diagnostic work up of osteoporosis. In some clinical settings such as the investigation of possible occult fractures after falls, additional imaging methods including computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and bone scintigraphy may be necessary to make up adequate diagnosis. However, it has to be questioned in which way all these diagnostic investigations can be effectively used in the diagnostic work up of geriatric patients. The article will give an overview of the different diagnostic methods with their possibilities and limitations and will present possible diagnostic work flows based on frequent clinical settings seen in geriatric patients.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAccidental FallsAgedAustriaDiagnostic Tests, RoutineFemaleFractures, SpontaneousHumansMaleMedical History TakingMobility LimitationOsteoporosisPredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID21956551
OpenAlexW60300642

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.