Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24899101›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2014

Osteoporosis treatment disparities: a 6-year aggregate analysis from national survey data.

T D Cunningham, B S Di Pace, J Ullal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Sex differences in recovery of quality of life 12 months post-fracture in community-dwelling older adults: analyses of the Australian arm of the International Costs and Utilities Related to Osteoporotic Fractures Study (AusICUROS).Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Disparities in osteoporosis treatments.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2016
    Observational
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

3 authors.

T D CunninghamGraduate Program in Public Health, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Harry Lester Building, 651 Colley Avenue, Norfolk, VA, 23507, USA, CunninTD@EVMS.edu.
B S Di Pace
J Ullal

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledWe studied factors to determine the receipt of osteoporosis treatment in individuals with osteoporosis. Treatment was associated with age, gender, race, body mass index (BMI), family history, arthritis and thyroid problems, daily glucocorticoid use, number of prescriptions and healthcare visits, and insurance type.

introductionOsteoporosis is underrecognized and undertreated. Few studies have examined factors associated with osteoporosis treatment in a large, national sample of men and women.

methodsWe aggregated National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data from 2005 to 2010 and created a subsample which included individuals 50 years or older who were identified to have osteoporosis either by self-report data or by bone density measurements. The primary outcome was the receipt of osteoporosis treatment either from self-report or from prescription records. Covariates included sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, and access to healthcare variables. Logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors that associate with osteoporosis treatment.

resultsFrom a sample of 31,0134 participants, 1,133 subjects (3.65 %) met the study criteria. Treatment was associated with age (odds ratio (OR) = 1.14), gender (OR = 13.25), race (OR = 2.23, White vs. Black; OR = 1.76, other vs. Black), BMI (OR = 1.67, normal vs. obese; OR = 2.68, overweight vs. obese), family history of osteoporosis (OR = 1.94), arthritis (OR = 1.43), daily glucocorticoid use (OR = 1.43), number of prescriptions (OR = 1.01), and number of healthcare visits in the past year (OR = 1.44, 4-9 vs. 0-3 visits). All odds ratios were statistically significant.

conclusionA large number of individuals diagnosed with osteoporosis above the age of 50 remain untreated. It is important for healthcare providers to better assess older adults with osteoporosis, including individuals who frequently receive medical care.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAgedAged, 80 and overBody Mass IndexBone DensityBone Density Conservation AgentsDrug PrescriptionsDrug UtilizationFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNutrition SurveysOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesBone Density Conservation Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.