ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2017
Comparison of fracture risk assessment tools in older men without prior hip or spine fracture: the MrOS study.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2017. 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 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Management of Osteoporosis in Parkinson's Disease: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The development and validation of a prediction model for imminent vertebral osteoporotic fracture in postmenopausal women.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- The Osteoporotic Fractures in Men study (MrOS): a 25-yr landmark study of skeletal health in older men.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2026Article
- Hip Fracture Risk Assessment Tools for Adults Aged 80 Years and Older.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Applications of Artificial Intelligence Methods for the Prediction of Osteoporotic Fractures.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Ireland DXA-FRAX may differ significantly and substantially to Web-FRAX.Archives of osteoporosis · 2023Article
- High prevalence of vertebral fractures at initiation of androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer.Journal of bone oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of fracture risk calculators in elderly fallers: a hospital-based cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Management of Osteoporosis in Men: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Approaches to Fracture Risk Assessment and Prevention.Current osteoporosis reports · 2021Review
- The Irish dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) Health Informatics Prediction (HIP) for Osteoporosis Project.BMJ open · 2020Article
- 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
- Volumetric Bone Mineral Density and Failure Load of Distal Limbs Predict Incident Clinical Fracture Independent HR-pQCT BMD and Failure Load Predicts Incident Clinical Fracture of FRAX and Clinical Risk Factors Among Older Men.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2018Article
- Individualized fracture risk assessment: State-of-the-art and room for improvement.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD), age plus femoral neck BMD T score, and three externally generated fracture risk tools had similar accuracy to identify older men who developed osteoporotic fractures. Risk tools with femoral neck BMD performed better than those without BMD. The externally developed risk tools were poorly calibrated.
introductionWe compared the performance of fracture risk assessment tools in older men, accounting for competing risks including mortality.
methodsA comparative ROC curve analysis assessed the ability of the QFracture, FRAX® and Garvan fracture risk tools, and femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) T score with or without age to identify incident fracture in community-dwelling men aged 65 years or older (N = 4994) without hip or clinical vertebral fracture or antifracture treatment at baseline.
resultsAmong risk tools calculated with BMD, the discriminative ability to identify men with incident hip fracture was similar for FRAX (AUC 0.77, 95% CI 0.73, 0.81), the Garvan tool (AUC 0.78, 95% CI 0.74, 0.82), age plus femoral neck BMD T score (AUC 0.79, 95% CI 0.75, 0.83), and femoral neck BMD T score alone (AUC 0.76, 95% CI 0.72, 0.81). Among risk tools calculated without BMD, the discriminative ability to identify hip fracture was similar for QFracture (AUC 0.69, 95% CI 0.66, 0.73), FRAX (AUC 0.70, 95% CI 0.66, 0.73), and the Garvan tool (AUC 0.71, 95% CI 0.67, 0.74). Correlated ROC curve analyses revealed better diagnostic accuracy for risk scores calculated with BMD compared with QFracture (P < 0.0001). Calibration was good for the internally generated BMD T score predictor with or without age and poor for the externally developed risk tools.
conclusionIn untreated older men without fragility fractures at baseline, an age plus femoral neck BMD T score classifier identified men with incident hip fracture as accurately as more complicated fracture risk scores.
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.