ArticleMedicine2016
Comparisons of Different Screening Tools for Identifying Fracture/Osteoporosis Risk Among Community-Dwelling Older People.
Article in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Machine learning-based screening model for osteoporosis in Chinese postmenopausal women: a nationwide study with prospective fracture validation.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Article
- A comprehensive evaluation of seven osteoporosis screening tools.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Review
- Osteoporosis evidence landscape to inform policy and practice: A comprehensive scoping review.Journal of family medicine and primary care · 2025Review
- Osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians and calcaneal quantitative ultrasound for identifying primary osteoporosis in Taiwanese postmenopausal women.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Discriminatory Accuracy of Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Asian Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of bone metabolism · 2024Article
- Fracture risk prediction in postmenopausal women from GO Study: the comparison between FRAX, Garvan, and POL-RISK algorithms.Archives of osteoporosis · 2024Article
- Decomposing and simplifying the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool-a module from the Taiwan-specific calculator.JBMR plus · 2024Article
- Age-dependent FRAX-based assessment and intervention thresholds for therapeutic decision making in osteoporosis in the Malaysian population.Archives of osteoporosis · 2024Article
- Assessing the utility of osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians in patients undergoing hip surgery.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2024Article
- Development of a diverse osteoporosis screening tool for older US adults from the health and retirement study.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Optimal fracture prediction thresholds for therapy onset, established from FRAX and Garvan algorithms: a longitudinal observation of the population representative female cohort from the RAC-OST-POL Study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2023Article
- Height Loss Is an Independent Predictor of Fracture Incidence in Postmenopausal Women: The Results from the Gliwice Osteoporosis Study (GO Study).Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Use of the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool as a Screening Tool for Osteoporosis in Saudi Postmenopausal Women.Cureus · 2023Article
- [Osteoporosis Screening Values of Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians Index and Body Mass Index in Middle-Aged and Elderly Tibetan Population in Tibet].Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the performance of osteoporosis/fracture screening models to identify high-risk women for osteoporosis: Bushehr elderly health (BEH) program.Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders · 2022Article
- Predicting the risk of osteoporosis in older Vietnamese women using machine learning approaches.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Comparison of fracture risk calculators in elderly fallers: a hospital-based cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Prediction Models for Osteoporotic Fractures Risk: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal.Aging and disease · 2022Review
- Improving the Hip Fracture Risk Prediction with a Statistical Shape-and-Intensity Model of the Proximal Femur.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A prospective study was conducted to compare criterion, predictive, and construct validities of 9 fracture/osteoporosis assessment tools, including calcaneal quantitative ultrasonography (QUS), Age Bulk One or Never Estrogens (ABONE), body weight criterion (BWC), Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), Garvan fracture risk calculator (GARVAN), Osteoporosis Risk Assessment Instrument (ORAI), Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS), Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA), and Simple Calculated Osteoporosis Risk Estimation (SCORE), among older men and women in Taiwan.Using the femoral neck dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) T-score as an external criterion, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, positive and negative likelihood ratios, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for each tool were calculated. The ability of these tools to predict injurious falls was examined. A principal component analysis was applied to understand whether these tools were measuring the same underlying construct.The FRAX, BWC, ORAI, OSIRIS, OSTA, and SCORE had AUCs of ≥0.8 in men, while the GARVAN, OSIRIS, OSTA, and SCORE had AUCs of ≥0.8 in women. The sensitivity, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio of the ABONE, BWC, ORAI, OSIRIS, OSTA, and SCORE tools in both men and women were 100%, ≥90%, and 0.0, respectively; the specificity and positive predictive value and likelihood ratio were far from satisfactory. The GARVAN displayed the best predictive ability of a fall in both men (AUCs, 0.653-0.686) and women (AUCs, 0.560-0.567), despite being smaller in women. The 9 screening tools and 2 central DXA measurements assessed 5 different factors, while the ABONE, BWC, ORAI, OSIRIS, OSTA, and SCORE measured the same one.Simple self-assessment tools can serve as initial screening instruments to rule out persons who have osteoporosis; however, these tools may measure a different construct other than fracture/osteoporosis risk.
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.