Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22964142›Full record

ArticleBone2012

Characteristics associated with anti-osteoporosis medication use: data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) USA cohort.

Pamela Guggina, Julie Flahive, Frederick H Hooven, Nelson B Watts, Ethel S Siris, Stuart Silverman, Christian Roux, Johannes Pfeilschifter, Susan L Greenspan, Adolfo Díez-Pérez and 8 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bone, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Frailty Change and Major Osteoporotic Fracture in the Elderly: Data from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women 3-Year Hamilton Cohort.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2016
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Current Status of the Diagnosis and Management of Osteoporosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Pharmacotherapy decisions among postmenopausal women attending a group medical consultation or a one-on-one specialist consultation at an osteoporosis center: an observational 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
    Observational
  8. Review
  9. The role of radiography in the study of spinal disorders.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2020
    Review
  10. FRAX and ethnicity.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2020
    Article
  11. Extensive undertreatment of osteoporosis in older Swedish women.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Examining the treatment gap and risk of subsequent fractures among females with a fragility fracture in the US Medicare population.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
  15. Development of a cloud-based application for the Fracture Liaison Service model of care.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
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Management of osteoporosis of the oldest old.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2014
    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

18 authors at 13 institutions in 7 countries.

Pamela GugginaCenter for Outcomes Research, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01605, USA. pamela.guggina@umassmed.edu
Julie Flahive
Frederick H Hooven
Nelson B Watts
Ethel S Siris
Stuart Silverman
Christian Roux
Johannes Pfeilschifter
Susan L Greenspan
Adolfo Díez-Pérez
Cyrus Cooper
Juliet E Compston
Roland Chapurlat
Steven Boonen
Jonathan D Adachi
Frederick A Anderson
Stephen Gehlbach
GLOW Investigators
University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · USAddenbrooke's Hospital · GBAlfried Krupp Hospital · DECedars-Sinai Medical Center · USColumbia University Irving Medical Center · USDélégation Paris 5 · FRHospital Del Mar · ESKU Leuven · BEMercy Health · USMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit · GBSt. Joseph's Hospital · CAUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

VARIABILITY, STABILITY & SMOOTHNESS OF WALKINGP30AG024827 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI JENNIFER S BRACH · 2004 to 2026
$28.6M
Medical Research Council MC_U147585824Medical Research Council MC_UP_A620_1014NIA NIH HHS P30 AG024827
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany women at risk of fracture do not receive anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM), while others may be receiving unnecessary treatment. PURPOSE: To examine the characteristics associated with AOM use among women at low and high risks of fracture.

methodsThe Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) is a prospective cohort study in which data were collected, via self-administered questionnaires, from 60,393 non-institutionalized women aged ≥ 55 years in 10 countries between October 1, 2006 and April 30, 2008. This is a cross-sectional analysis of baseline USA data, in which women were classified as having low fracture risk (<65 years; no FRAX risk factors) or high fracture risk (≥65 years; prior fracture or ≥ 2 other FRAX risk factors).

resultsOf 27,957 women, 3013 were at low risk of fracture and 3699 were at high risk. Only 35.7% of high-risk women reported AOM treatment, rising to 39.5% for those with self-reported osteopenia and 65.4% for those with self-reported osteoporosis. Conversely, 13.4% of low-risk women reported AOM, rising to 28.7% for osteopenia and 62.4% for osteoporosis. Characteristics associated with significantly higher AOM treatment rates among low- and high-risk women were: osteoporosis (odds ratios 75.3 and 18.1, respectively), osteopenia (17.9 and 6.3), concern about osteoporosis (2.0 and 1.8), higher perceived risk of fracture (2.3 and 1.6), and higher vitality score (1.7 and 1.6).

conclusionUse of AOM is frequently inconsistent with published guidelines in both high- and low-risk women. Characteristics other than FRAX fracture risk appear to influence this use, particularly the presence of self-reported osteoporosis.

Indexed as

AgedBone Diseases, MetabolicFemaleFractures, BoneHumansLogistic ModelsLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID22964142
PMCPMC4873774
OpenAlexW2089872166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.