ArticleClinical rheumatology2014
Agreement between FRAX scores calculated with and without bone mineral density in women with osteopenia in Turkey.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the effects of β1-selective beta-blockers on bone mineral density and fracture risk in postmenopausal womenTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2020Article
- State of the art in osteoporosis risk assessment and treatment.Journal of endocrinological investigation · 2019Review
- The association between 10-year fracture risk by FRAX and osteoporotic fractures with disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.Clinical rheumatology · 2018Article
- The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide.Bone · 2017Review
- Reprint of: The impact of fragility fracture and approaches to osteoporosis risk assessment worldwide.International journal of orthopaedic and trauma nursing · 2017Article
- Article
- FRAX fracture risk in women with a recent fracture of the distal forearm: agreement between assessments with and without bone mineral density and impact of measurement side in the individual patient.Clinical rheumatology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to analyze the agreement between FRAX scores calculated with and without femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD) and to investigate the resultant treatment recommendations in women with osteopenia. A cross-sectional review of postmenopausal women who were referred for DXA evaluation was conducted. One hundred twenty-nine postmenopausal women aged 40 years and older with osteopenia [FN T-score between -1 and (-2.5)] were recruited for the study. Absolute agreement between FRAX scores calculated with and without BMD was analyzed by intraclass correlation analysis (ICC). Thresholds recommended by National Osteoporosis Foundation were used for treatment recommendations. Correlation between demographic factors and the difference in BMD+ and BMD- FRAX scores was analyzed by Spearman correlation test. Agreement levels and treatment recommendations were also analyzed in 112/129 patients without previous fracture. Agreement between BMD+ and BMD- MO and hip FRAX scores was good (ICC 0.867) and fair to good (ICC 0.641), respectively. In patients without previous fracture, agreement between MO and hip fracture probabilities was good (ICC = 0.838 and ICC = 0.778, respectively). Treatment recommendations with respect to treatment threshold of ≥3 for hip fracture probabilities were identical in 120/129 (93 %) cases. Difference between BMD+ and BMD- fracture probabilities was correlated with age and FN BMD. In most cases, FRAX without BMD provided the same treatment recommendations as FRAX with BMD in postmenopausal women with osteopenia. Exclusion of patients with previous fracture yielded better agreement levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.