Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24721668›Full record

Trial reportBMC endocrine disorders2014

Prevalence and determinants of osteoporosis in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Gudrun Leidig-Bruckner, Sonja Grobholz, Thomas Bruckner, Christa Scheidt-Nave, Peter Nawroth, Jochen G Schneider

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC endocrine disorders, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Bone mineral density at femoral neck and lumbar spine in adults with type 1 diabetes: a meta-analysis and review of the literature.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    Pooled it
  6. Prevalence, risk factors and adverse health outcomes of osteosarcopenia in middle-aged and older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus-a scoping review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Prevalence and risk factors for osteoporosis in type 1 diabetes-results from an observational study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Advances in laboratory medicine · 2024
    Article
  15. Osteocalcin associates with bone mineral density andAdvances in laboratory medicine · 2024
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Gudrun Leidig-BrucknerPractice for Endocrinology and Nuclear Medicine, Brückenstraße 21, Heidelberg 69120, Germany. gudrun.leidigbruckner@raue-praxis.de.
Sonja Grobholz
Thomas Bruckner
Christa Scheidt-Nave
Peter Nawroth
Jochen G Schneider

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIncreased risk of osteoporosis and its clinical significance in patients with diabetes is controversial. We analyze osteoporosis prevalence and determinants of bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes.

methodsThree hundred and ninety-eight consecutive diabetic patients from a single outpatient clinic received a standardized questionnaire on osteoporosis risk factors, and were evaluated for diabetes-related complications, HbA1c levels, and lumbar spine (LS) and femoral neck (FN) BMD. Of these, 139 (71 men, 68 women) type 1 and 243 (115 men, 128 women) type 2 diabetes patients were included in the study. BMD (T-scores and values adjusted for age, BMI and duration of disease) was compared between patient groups and between patients with type 2 diabetes and population-based controls (255 men, 249 women).

resultsFor both genders, adjusted BMD was not different between the type 1 and type 2 diabetes groups but was higher in the type 2 group compared with controls (p < 0.0001). Osteoporosis prevalence (BMD T-score < -2.5 SD) at FN and LS was equivalent in the type 1 and type 2 diabetes groups, but lower in type 2 patients compared with controls (FN: 13.0% vs 21.2%, LS: 6.1% vs 14.9% men; FN: 21.9% vs 32.1%, LS: 9.4% vs 26.9% women). Osteoporosis prevalence was higher at FN-BMD than at LS-BMD. BMD was positively correlated with BMI and negatively correlated with age, but not correlated with diabetes-specific parameters (therapy, HbBA1c, micro- and macrovascular complications) in all subgroups. Fragility fracture prevalence was low (5.2%) and not different between diabetes groups. Fracture patients had lower BMDs compared with those without fractures; however, BMD T-score was above -2.5 SD in most patients.

conclusionsDiabetes-specific parameters did not predict BMD. Fracture occurrence was similar in both diabetes groups and related to lower BMD, but seems unrelated to the threshold T-score, <-2.5 SD. These results suggest that osteoporosis, and related fractures, is a clinically significant and commonly underestimated problem in diabetes patients.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBone DensityCase-Control StudiesCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes Mellitus, Type 1Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleFemur NeckFollow-Up StudiesFractures, BoneHumansLumbar Vertebrae

Identifiers

PMID24721668
PMCPMC4021186

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.