SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2012
Steroidal contraceptives and bone fractures in women: evidence from observational studies.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2012. 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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Steroidal contraceptives: effect on bone fractures in women.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.MMWR. Recommendations and reports : Morbidity and mortality weekly report. Recommendations and reports · 2024Article
- Effects of orally administered hormonal contraceptives on the musculoskeletal system of healthy premenopausal women-A systematic review.Health science reports · 2022Review
- Article
- Expert panel consensus recommendations for diagnosis and treatment of secondary osteoporosis in children.Pediatric rheumatology online journal · 2020Article
- Oral contraceptive use and fracture risk-a retrospective study of 12,970 women in the UK.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017Article
- Bone health and HIV in resource-limited settings: a scoping review.Current opinion in HIV and AIDS · 2016Article
- Oral contraceptive use and fracture risk around the menopausal transition.Menopause (New York, N.Y.) · 2016Article
- Presentation and management of osteoporosis presenting in association with pregnancy or lactation.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2015Review
- Hormonal Contraception and Risk of Psychiatric and Other Noncommunicable Diseases in HIV-Infected Women.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2015Article
- Medication-induced osteoporosis: screening and treatment strategies.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2014Review
- Contraception in women over 40 years of age.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAge-related decline in bone mass increases the risk of skeletal fractures, especially those of the hip, spine, and wrist. Steroidal contraceptives have been associated with changes in bone mineral density in women. Whether such changes affect the risk of fractures later in life is unclear. Hormonal contraceptives are among the most effective and most widely-used contraceptives. Concern about fractures may limit the use of these effective contraceptives. Observational studies can collect data on premenopausal contraceptive use as well as fracture incidence later in life.
objectivesWe systematically reviewed the evidence from observational studies of hormonal contraceptive use for contraception and the risk of fracture in women. SEARCH
methodsIn May 2012, we searched for observational studies. The databases included MEDLINE, POPLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), LILACS, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science. We also searched for recent clinical trials through ClinicalTrials.gov and the ICTRP. For other studies, we examined reference lists of relevant articles and wrote to investigators for additional reports. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included cohort and case-control studies of hormonal contraceptive use. Interventions included comparisons of a hormonal contraceptive with a nonhormonal contraceptive, no contraceptive, or another hormonal contraceptive. The primary outcome was the risk of fracture. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data. One author entered the data into RevMan, and a second author verified accuracy. We examined the quality of evidence using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS), developed for case-control and cohort studies. Sensitivity analysis included studies of moderate or high quality based on our assessment with the NOS.Given the need to control for confounding factors in observational studies, we used adjusted estimates from the models as reported by the authors. Where we did not have adjusted analyses, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Due to varied study designs, we did not conduct meta-analysis. MAIN
resultsWe included 14 studies (7 case-control and 7 cohort studies). These examined oral contraceptives (OCs) (N=12), depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) (N=4), and the hormonal intrauterine device (IUD) (N=1). This section focuses on evidence from the six studies with moderate or high quality evidence that we included in the sensitivity analysis.All six studies examined oral contraceptive use. We noted few associations with fracture risk. One cohort study found OC ever-users had increased risk for all fractures (reported RR 1.20; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.34). However, a case-control study with later data from a subset reported no association except for those with 10 years or more since use (reported OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.03 to 2.33). Another case-control study reported increased risk only for those who had 10 or more prescriptions (reported OR 1.09; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16). A cohort study of postmenopausal women found no increased fracture risk for OC use after excluding women with prior fracture. Two other studies found little evidence of association between OC use and fracture risk. A cohort study noted increased risk for subgroups, such as those with longer use or specific intervals since use. A case-control study reported increased risk for any fracture only among young women with less than average use.Two case-control studies in the sensitivity analysis also examined progestin-only contraceptives. One reported increased fracture risk for DMPA ever-use (reported OR 1.44 (95% CI 1.01 to 2.06), more than four years of use (reported OR 2.16; 95% CI 1.32 to 3.53), and women over 50 years old. The other noted increased risk for any past use, including one or two prescriptions (reported OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.29), and for current use of 3 to 9 or 10 or more prescriptions. In addition, one study reported reduced fracture risk for ever-use of the hormonal IUD (reported OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.87) and longer use of that IUD. AUTHORS'
conclusionsObservational studies do not indicate an overall association between OC use and fracture risk. Some reported increased risk for specific user subgroups. DMPA users may have an increased fracture risk. One study indicated hormonal IUD use may be associated with decreased risk. Observational studies need adjusted analysis because the comparison groups usually differ. Researchers should be clear about the variables examined in multivariate analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22895991What 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.