Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30367203›Full record

ReviewRheumatology international2018

Treatment recommendations based on fracture risk status are not consistently provided in osteoporosis guidelines.

Joanna E M Sale, Matthew Gray, Daniel Mancuso, Taucha Inrig, Gilles Boire, Marie-Claude Beaulieu, Larry Funnell, Earl Bogoch

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Rheumatology international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Joanna E M SaleMusculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada. salej@smh.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-0389-3038
Matthew GrayMusculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Daniel MancusoMusculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
Taucha InrigMusculoskeletal Health and Outcomes Research, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1651-6605
Gilles BoireDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12th Avenue North, Room 3853, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2481-5821
Marie-Claude BeaulieuDepartment of Family Medicine and Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, 3001, 12e Avenue North, Sherbrooke, QC, J1H 5N4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5167-9901
Larry FunnellOsteoporosis Canada, 1200 Eglinton Avenue East, Suite 500, Toronto, ON, M3C 1H9, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1010-9013
Earl BogochDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6627-4336

Funding

CIHR PCS-146431
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We examined international osteoporosis guidelines to determine the tools used to assess fracture risk, the classification of fracture risk presented, and the recommendations based on fracture risk status. We conducted a document analysis of guidelines from the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) website retrieved as of May 10, 2018, focusing on guidelines written in English only. Two reviewers independently reviewed each document and the following data were extracted: (1) fracture risk tool(s) endorsed; (2) classification system used to describe fracture risk status (e.g., low, moderate, high); and (3) recommendations based on risk status (e.g., pharmacological treatment). Two additional reviewers verified all data extraction. A total of 112 guidelines were listed on the IOF website, of which 94 were located either through the provided link or through a PubMed search. Of 70 guidelines written in English, 63 guidelines discussed the concept of fracture risk of which, 39 endorsed FRAX. Twenty-eight guidelines defined fracture risk categories or thresholds which determined recommendations. In total, 26 provided a risk category or threshold which constituted an indication for pharmacotherapy. Twelve guidelines reported a moderate, medium, or intermediate risk category which was associated with variable recommendations for testing and treatment. Despite the generally accepted international shift to fracture risk as a basis for treatment decisions, the majority of guidelines in English did not provide treatment recommendations based on fracture risk status. In guidelines with recommendations based on fracture risk status, thresholds and recommendations varied making international comparisons of treatment difficult.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesBone Density Conservation AgentsClinical Decision-MakingHumansOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesPractice Guidelines as TopicRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeBone Density Conservation AgentsDrug therapyOsteoporosisPatient careRisk assessment

Identifiers

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.