Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25807913›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2015

Cost-effectiveness of fracture prevention in rural women with limited access to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry.

K Ito, W D Leslie

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, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Consensus statement on the application of artificial intelligence in osteoporosis screening and management: perspectives from the Asia-Pacific region.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of clinical fracture-risk assessment tools in reducing future osteoporotic fractures among older adults: a structured 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 · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cost-effectiveness of combined oral bisphosphonate therapy and falls prevention exercise for fracture prevention in the USA.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2017
    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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

K ItoDivision of Geriatric Medicine, Department of Primary Care, University of New England College of Osteopathic Medicine, 11 Hills Beach Road, Biddeford, ME, 04005, USA, kito@une.edu.
W D Leslie
New England College · USUniversity of Manitoba · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledA reduced reimbursement for office-based dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is likely to exacerbate the burden of fractures in rural areas. Our cost-effective analysis suggests that, in areas where access to DXA is limited, treatment for women at high clinical risk for fractures could both improve health and save money.

introductionTo evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various fracture prevention strategies for rural women with limited access to dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA).

methodsA Markov model was developed using data from the published literature and the Manitoba Bone Density Program. The participants were a simulated cohort of rural women aged 65 years with travel distance between 10 and 24 mi to the nearest DXA site. The evaluated strategies were (1) watchful waiting, (2) bone mineral density (BMD)-based strategy (i.e., DXA screening followed by pharmacotherapy based on BMD), and (3) clinical risk factor (CRF)-based strategy (i.e., pharmacotherapy for women at high risk for fractures by the World Health Organization Fracture Risk Assessment Tool [FRAX]). The outcome was an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) measured by cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The analysis was preformed from a societal perspective over a lifetime horizon.

resultsIn the base-case analysis, the BMD-based strategy had an ICER of $6000 per QALY gained. For those with travel distance between 25 and 39 mi, the BMD-based strategy would have an ICER of $140,800 per QALY gained. For those with travel distance greater than 40 mi, the CRF-based strategy would be more effective and less costly than other strategies.

conclusionsIn areas where DXA is readily available, DXA screening followed by pharmacotherapy guided by BMD would be preferred. In areas with more limited access to DXA, pharmacotherapy for women at high clinical risk for fractures based on FRAX could both improve health and save money from the societal perspective.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonAgedBone Density Conservation AgentsCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth Care CostsHealth Services AccessibilityHumansManitobaMarkov ChainsMass ScreeningMedically Underserved AreaModels, EconometricOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesQuality of LifeBone Density Conservation Agents

Identifiers

PMID25807913
OpenAlexW1981958483

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.