Trial reportClinical interventions in aging2017
Improving the diagnosis and treatment of osteoporosis using a senior-friendly peer-led community education and mentoring model: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Clinical interventions in aging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- What is the volume, diversity and nature of recent, robust evidence for the use of peer support in health and social care? An evidence and gap map.Campbell systematic reviews · 2022Review
- Osteoporosis Knowledge and Health Beliefs Among Female Community Leaders in Peru.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated a 6-month peer-led community education and mentorship program to improve the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis.
methodsTen seniors (74-90 years of age) were trained to become peer educators and mentors and deliver the intervention. In the subsequent RCT, 105 seniors (mean age =80.5±6.9; 89% female) were randomly assigned to the peer-led education and mentorship program (n=53) or control group (n=52). Knowledge was assessed at baseline and 6 months. Success was defined as discussing osteoporosis risk with their family physician, obtaining a bone mineral density assessment, and returning to review their risk profile and receive advice and/or treatment.
resultsKnowledge of osteoporosis did not change significantly. There was no difference in knowledge change between the two groups (mean difference =1.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] of difference -0.76 to 3.36). More participants in the intervention group achieved a successful outcome (odds ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.06-0.42,
conclusionPeer-led education and mentorship can promote positive health behavior in seniors. This model was effective for improving osteoporosis risk assessment, diagnosis, and treatment in a community setting.
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.