Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30054881›Full record

SynthesisJournal of general internal medicine2018

Metasynthesis of Patient Attitudes Toward Bone Densitometry.

Aaron T Seaman, Melissa Steffen, Taisha Doo, Heather S Healy, Samantha L Solimeo

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of general internal medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Perspectives of patients with depression and chronic pain about bone health after a fragility fracture: A qualitative study.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Article
  4. Cultivating across "pockets of excellence": challenges to sustaining efforts to improve osteoporosis care.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Aaron T SeamanDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Comprehensive Access & Delivery Research and Evaluation (CADRE), Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, IA, USA. aaron-seaman@uiowa.edu.
Melissa SteffenDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Comprehensive Access & Delivery Research and Evaluation (CADRE), Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Taisha DooCarver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Heather S HealyUniversity of Iowa Libraries, Hardin Library for the Health Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Samantha L SolimeoDepartment of Veterans Affairs, Center for Comprehensive Access & Delivery Research and Evaluation (CADRE), Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Iowa City VA Health Care System · USGlenbrook Hospital · USState Library of Iowa · US

Funding

HSRD VA IK2 HX001542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBone densitometry (e.g., dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry or "DXA") is strongly associated with osteoporosis treatment; however, rates of DXA are low. While studies have demonstrated a continued need for primary care provider education on the role of DXA in preventive care, little is known about the role of patient attitudes toward DXA. This review's purpose is to synthesize the evidence about the effects of patient perceptions and experiences of DXA on osteoporosis prevention.

methodsA metasynthesis was conducted of English language, peer-reviewed publications, searching relevant databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science Social Science Citation Index, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts. Identified articles' quality was appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Qualitative Checklist, and an iterative process of data evaluation, integration, and synthesis was used to develop the findings.

resultsThirteen articles from ten studies were identified, composing an aggregated sample of 265 people (231 women). Participant attitudes toward screening ranged from receptive to ambivalent to concerned about results. Participants' understandings of DXA and its role in clinical care were limited. Knowledge of osteoporosis was also partial and influenced by lay sources, the media, and health care providers. Primary care providers strongly influenced participant behavior, especially if participants had a more passive approach to health care. Participants reported less concern about expected barriers of health care access and cost.

conclusionMinimal knowledge exists of patient perceptions and experiences of DXA among those who are fracture naïve: Prior research has focused primarily on secondary fracture prevention contexts. Our metasynthesis reveals patients' significant reliance, given their limited risk appraisal and knowledge, upon primary care providers in decision-making. We urge colleagues to conduct qualitative research on DXA barriers among general primary care population in order to facilitate health care delivery systems better equipped to diagnose and treat patients before their first fracture.

Indexed as

Absorptiometry, PhotonHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeDelivery of Health CareHealth Services ResearchHumansOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesPatient Acceptance of Health CarePhysician-Patient RelationsPrimary Health CareOsteoporosisPreventive careQualitative researchSystematic reviews

Identifiers

PMID30054881
PMCPMC6153231
OpenAlexW2883638705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.