Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23088223›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2012

FRAX® tool, the WHO algorithm to predict osteoporotic fractures: the first analysis of its discriminative and predictive ability in the Spanish FRIDEX cohort.

Rafael Azagra, Genís Roca, Gloria Encabo, Amada Aguyé, Marta Zwart, Sílvia Güell, Núria Puchol, Emili Gene, Enrique Casado, Pilar Sancho and 15 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Predictive value of BMD for hip and other fractures: a meta-analysis to update FRAX.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Update of the fracture risk prediction tool FRAX: a systematic review of potential cohorts and analysis plan.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Atencion primaria · 2018
    Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. How well do the FRAX (Australia) and Garvan calculators predict incident fractures? Data from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.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
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

25 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.

Rafael AzagraDepartment of Medicine, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona-UAB, Psg Vall d'Hebrón 119-129, 08035 Barcelona, Spain. rafael.azagra@uab.cat
Genís Roca
Gloria Encabo
Amada Aguyé
Marta Zwart
Sílvia Güell
Núria Puchol
Emili Gene
Enrique Casado
Pilar Sancho
Silvia Solà
Pere Torán
Milagros Iglesias
Maria Carmen Gisbert
Francesc López-Expósito
Jesús Pujol-Salud
Yolanda Fernandez-Hermida
Ana Puente
Mireia Rosàs
Vicente Bou
Juan José Antón
Gustavo Lansdberg
Juan Carlos Martín-Sánchez
Adolf Díez-Pérez
Daniel Prieto-Alhambra
Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària Jordi Gol · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESHospital del Mar Research Institute · ESHospital General de Granollers · ESUniversitat Internacional de Catalunya · ESBellvitge University Hospital · ESCatalan Institute for Water Research · ESCatalonian Research and Innovation Centre · ESHospital Terrassa · ESNuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversidade José do Rosário Vellano · BRUniversitat de Lleida · ESVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe WHO has recently published the FRAX® tool to determine the absolute risk of osteoporotic fracture at 10 years. This tool has not yet been validated in Spain. METHODS/

designA prospective observational study was undertaken in women in the FRIDEX cohort (Barcelona) not receiving bone active drugs at baseline. Baseline measurements: known risk factors including those of FRAX® and a DXA. Follow up data on self-reported incident major fractures (hip, spine, humerus and wrist) and verified against patient records. The calculation of absolute risk of major fracture and hip fracture was by FRAX® website. This work follows the guidelines of the STROBE initiative for cohort studies. The discriminative capacity of FRAX® was analyzed by the Area Under Curve (AUC), Receiver Operating Characteristics (ROC) and the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The predictive capacity was determined using the ratio of observed fractures/expected fractures by FRAX® (ObsFx/ExpFx).

resultsThe study subjects were 770 women from 40 to 90 years of age in the FRIDEX cohort. The mean age was 56.8 ± 8 years. The fractures were determined by structured telephone questionnaire and subsequent testing in medical records at 10 years. Sixty-five (8.4%) women presented major fractures (17 hip fractures). Women with fractures were older, had more previous fractures, more cases of rheumatoid arthritis and also more osteoporosis on the baseline DXA. The AUC ROC of FRAX® for major fracture without bone mineral density (BMD) was 0.693 (CI 95%; 0.622-0.763), with T-score of femoral neck (FN) 0.716 (CI 95%; 0.646-0.786), being 0.888 (CI 95%; 0.824-0.952) and 0.849 (CI 95%; 0.737-0.962), respectively for hip fracture. In the model with BMD alone was 0.661 (CI 95%; 0.583-0.739) and 0.779 (CI 95%; 0.631-0.929). In the model with age alone was 0.668 (CI 95%; 0.603-0.733) and 0.882 (CI 95%; 0.832-0.936). In both cases there are not significant differences against FRAX® model. The overall predictive value for major fracture by ObsFx/ExpFx ratio was 2.4 and 2.8 for hip fracture without BMD. With BMD was 2.2 and 2.3 respectively. Sensitivity of the four was always less than 50%. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test showed a good correlation only after calibration with ObsFx/ExpFx ratio.

conclusionsThe current version of FRAX® for Spanish women without BMD analysed by the AUC ROC demonstrate a poor discriminative capacity to predict major fractures but a good discriminative capacity for hip fractures. Its predictive capacity does not adjust well because leading to underdiagnosis for both predictions major and hip fractures. Simple models based only on age or BMD alone similarly predicted that more complex FRAX® models.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAlgorithmsBone DensityWorld Health OrganizationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOsteoporotic FracturesPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID23088223
PMCPMC3518201
OpenAlexW2033010624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.