ArticleJournal of endocrinological investigation2015
Gastrointestinal and renal side effects of bisphosphonates: differentiating between no proof of difference and proof of no difference.
Article in Journal of endocrinological investigation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Qianggu capsule for the treatment of primary osteoporosis: evidence from a Chinese patent medicine.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Calcium carbonate-enriched pumpkin affects calcium status in ovariectomized rats.Journal of food science and technology · 2023Article
- Galangin suppresses RANKL-induced osteoclastogenesis via inhibiting MAPK and NF-κB signalling pathways.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2021Article
- Effective secondary fracture prevention: implementation of a global benchmarking of clinical quality using the IOF Capture the Fracture® Best Practice Framework tool.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 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
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was aimed at comparing the safety of bisphosphonates in women with osteoporosis by application of equivalence testing.
methodsGastrointestinal and renal side effects were evaluated based on information published in randomized controlled trials.
resultsThe data on gastrointestinal side effects (47 trials) indicated that alendronate, risedronate etidronate, and zolendronate have similar rates of the adverse effects; application of Bayesian network meta-analysis showed that equivalence was demonstrated according to margins around ±10%. The data on renal safety were more sparse and suffered from the use of different outcome measures; hence, a single trial could be evaluated. This trial showed a similar effect of alendronate and risedronate on renal function at 12 months; equivalence was based on differences between the two agents in renal function with margins of less than ±10.4 ml/min.
conclusionOur study provided quantitative information to determine to what extent bisphosphonates can be considered equivalent in terms of gastrointestinal and renal side effects.
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.