ArticleJournal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners2014
Screening, assessment, and treatment of osteoporosis for the nurse practitioner: key questions and answers for clinical practice--a Canadian perspective.
Article in Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Moxibustion treatment for primary osteoporosis: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Efficacy of Moxibustion for Primary Osteoporosis: A Trial Sequential Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Review
- Implementing models of care for musculoskeletal conditions in health systems to support value-based care.Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUsing a case-based approach, we review key clinical questions relevant to nurse practitioners (NPs) regarding the screening, assessment, and treatment of patients at risk for osteoporosis and fractures in a Canadian general practice setting. DATA SOURCES: A case presentation with relevant questions and answers to guide management of a patient.
conclusionsOsteoporosis is a common condition in both the aging male and female populations. Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of osteoporosis is lagging behind relative to other chronic disease states. NPs have a unique opportunity to help reduce this care gap by playing an integral role in the identification, risk stratification, and treatment of patients at risk for osteoporosis and fractures. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: This case highlights the important role an NP can have in screening a patient previously not diagnosed or managed for osteoporosis. Performing a focused history and physical exam of the patient to determine appropriate screening tests and fracture risk will help in guiding treatment decisions.
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.