ReviewCurrent opinion in pharmacology2014
Are we taking full advantage of the growing number of pharmacological treatment options for osteoporosis?
Review in Current opinion in pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic Medicine: Lessons Learned From Monogenic and Complex Bone Disorders.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2020Review
- CORR Insights®: fractures in geriatric mice show decreased callus expansion and bone volume.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2014Article
- Mapping the natural variation in whole bone stiffness and strength across skeletal sites.Bone · 2014Article
- Moving toward a prevention strategy for osteoporosis by giving a voice to a silent disease.Women's midlife healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We are becoming increasingly aware that the manner in which our skeleton ages is not uniform within and between populations. Pharmacological treatment options with the potential to combat age-related reductions in skeletal strength continue to become available on the market, notwithstanding our current inability to fully utilize these treatments by accounting for an individual's unique biomechanical needs. Revealing new molecular mechanisms that improve the targeted delivery of pharmaceuticals is important; however, this only addresses one part of the solution for differential age-related bone loss. To improve current treatment regimes, we must also consider specific biomechanical mechanisms that define how these molecular pathways ultimately impact whole bone fracture resistance. By improving our understanding of the relationship between molecular and biomechanical mechanisms, clinicians will be better equipped to take full advantage of the mounting pharmacological treatments available. Ultimately this will enable us to reduce fracture risk among the elderly more strategically, more effectively, and more economically. In this interest, the following review summarizes the biomechanical basis of current treatment strategies while defining how different biomechanical mechanisms lead to reduced fracture resistance. It is hoped that this may serve as a template for the identification of new targets for pharmacological treatments that will enable clinicians to personalize care so that fracture incidence may be globally reduced.
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.