ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016
Rationale of the Spanish FRAX model in decision-making for predicting osteoporotic fractures: an update of FRIDEX cohort of Spanish women.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Lebanese GRADE-based vitamin D guidelines: a paradigm for the MENA region.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025Guideline
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Executive summary: Italian guidelines for diagnosis, risk stratification, and care continuity of fragility fractures 2021.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic review of major osteoporotic fracture to hip fracture incidence rate ratios worldwide: implications for Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX)-derived estimates.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2021Pooled it
- Performance of predictive tools to identify individuals at risk of non-traumatic fracture: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2019Pooled it
- Association Between Femoral Neck Bone Mineral Density and Osteoporotic Fracture Counts in U.S. Adults: A NHANES 2005-2020 Analysis.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
- Electronic Health Records (EHRs) Can Identify Patients at High Risk of Fracture but Require Substantial Race Adjustments to Currently Available Fracture Risk Calculators.Journal of general internal medicine · 2023Article
- Predictive capacity of FRAX in a spanish region with a hip fracture rate close to the national mean.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Prevalence and treatment of fragility fractures in Spanish primary care: PREFRAOS study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2022Observational
- Validation of the Taiwan FRAX® calculator for the prediction of fracture risk.Archives of osteoporosis · 2022Article
- In-hospital care, complications, and 4-month mortality following a hip or proximal femur fracture: the Spanish registry of osteoporotic femur fractures prospective cohort study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2018Article
- Epidemiology of hip fracture and the development of FRAX in Ukraine.Archives of osteoporosis · 2017Article
- Epidemiology of fractures in Armenia: development of a country-specific FRAX model and comparison to its surrogate.Archives of osteoporosis · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe FRAX® tool estimates the risk of a fragility fracture among the population and many countries have been evaluating its performance among their populations since its creation in 2007. The purpose of this study is to update the first FRIDEX cohort analysis comparing FRAX with the bone mineral density (BMD) model, and its predictive abilities.
methodsThe discriminatory ability of the FRAX was assessed using the 'area under curve' of the receiver operating characteristic (AUC-ROC). Predictive ability was assessed by comparing estimated risk fractures with incidence fractures after a 10-year follow up period.
resultsOne thousand three hundred eight women ≥ 40 and ≤ 90 years followed up during a 10-year period. The AUC for major osteoporotic fractures using FRAX without DXA was 0.686 (95 % CI 0.630-0.742) and using FN T-score of DXA 0.714 (95 % CI 0.661-0.767). Using only the traditional parameters of DXA (FN T-score), the AUC was 0.706 (95 % CI 0.652-0.760). The AUC for hip osteoporotic fracture was 0.883 (95 % CI 0.827-0.938), 0.857 (95 % CI 0.773-0.941), and 0.814 (95 % CI 0.712-0.916) respectively. For major osteoporotic fractures, the overall predictive value using the ratio Observed fractures/Expected fractures calculated with FRAX without T-score of DXA was 2.29 and for hip fractures 2.28 and with the inclusion of the T-score 2.01 and 1.83 respectively. However, for hip fracture in women < 65 years was 1.53 and 1.24 respectively.
conclusionsThe FRAX tool has been found to show a good discriminatory capacity for detecting women at high risk of fragility fracture, and is better for hip fracture than major fracture. The test of sensibility shows that it is, at least, not inferior than when using BMD model alone. The predictive capacity of FRAX tool needs some adjustment. This capacity is better for hip fracture prediction and better for women < 65 years. Further studies in Catalonia and other regions of Spain are needed to fine tune the FRAX tool's predictive capability.
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.