ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2017
A comparison of electronic and manual fracture risk assessment tools in screening elderly male US veterans at risk for osteoporosis.
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, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- 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 screening using X-ray assessment and osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians in hip surgery patients.Journal of bone and mineral metabolism · 2025Article
- Performance of USPSTF-recommended osteoporosis risk assessment tools in identifying osteoporosis in older men: a multicentre retrospective study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Delivering fracture prevention services to rural US veterans through telemedicine: a process evaluation.Archives of osteoporosis · 2021Article
- New Developments in Fracture Risk Assessment for Current Osteoporosis Reports.Current osteoporosis reports · 2020Review
- Population-Based Osteoporosis Primary Prevention and Screening for Quality of Care in Osteoporosis, Current Osteoporosis Reports.Current osteoporosis reports · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This study compares four screening tools in their ability to predict osteoporosis. We found that there was no significant difference between the tools. These results provide support for the use of automated screening tools which work in conjunction with the electronic medical record and help improve screening rates for osteoporosis.
introductionThe purpose of this study is to compare the performance of four fracture risk assessment tools (FRATs) in identifying osteoporosis by bone mineral density (BMD) T-score: Veterans Affairs Fracture Absolute Risk Assessment Tool (VA-FARA), World Health Organization's Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX), electronic FRAX (e-FRAX), and Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Screening Tool (OST).
methodsWe performed a cross-sectional analysis of all patients enrolled in the VA Salt Lake City bone health team (BHT) who had completed a DXA scan between February 1, 2012, and February 1, 2013. DXA scan results were obtained by chart abstraction. For calculation of FRAX, osteoporosis risk factors were obtained from a screening questionnaire completed prior to DXA. For VA-FARA and e-FRAX, risk factors were derived from the electronic medical record (EMR). Clinical risk scores were calculated and compared against the gold standard of DXA-based osteoporosis. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were plotted, and areas under the curve (AUC) were compared.
resultsA cohort of 463 patients met eligibility criteria (mean age 80.4 years). One hundred twelve patients (24%) had osteoporosis as defined by DXA T-score ≤-2.5. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were calculated. ROC statistics were compared and did not reach statistical significance difference between FRATs in identifying DXA-based osteoporosis.
conclusionsOur study suggests that all FRATs tested perform similarly in identifying osteoporosis among elderly, primarily Caucasian, male veterans. If these electronic screening methods perform similarly for fracture outcomes, they could replace manual FRAX and thus improve efficiency in identifying individuals who should be sent for DXA scan.
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.