ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2019
Administrative healthcare data applied to fracture risk assessment.
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, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial Intelligence Approaches for Osteoporotic Fracture Risk Prediction Using Administrative Health Data: A Systematic Review.Calcified tissue international · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- End-Organ Damage Associated With Primary Hyperparathyroidism.JAMA surgery · 2026Article
- Prediction of imminent osteoporotic fracture risk in Danish postmenopausal women-can the addition of self-reported clinical risk factors improve the prediction of the register-based FREM algorithm?Archives of osteoporosis · 2025Article
- The optimal cut-off values of FRAX without BMD for predicting osteoporosis fracture risk in the older adults at Nan, Thailand.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2024Article
- Digital health interventions for osteoporosis and post-fragility fracture care.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2022Review
- 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
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fracture risk scores generated from population-based administrative healthcare data showed comparable or better discrimination than the Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) scores computed without bone mineral density for predicting incident major osteoporotic fracture. Administrative data may be useful to identify individuals at high fracture risk at the population level. PURPOSE: To evaluate the discrimination of fracture risk scores defined using inputs available from administrative data for predicting incident major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF) alone.
methodsUsing the Manitoba Bone Mineral Density (BMD) Database (1997-2013), we identified 61,041 individuals aged 50 years or older with healthcare coverage following their first BMD test. We calculated two-modified FRAX)scores based on administrative data: FRAX-A and FRAX-A
resultsDuring a mean of 7 years of follow-up, we identified 5306 (8.7%) incident MOF and 1532 (2.5%) incident HF. The c-statistic for MOF associated with FRAX-A was lower than FRAX (BMD) (0.655 vs 0.675; P < 0.05) and comparable to FRAX (no-BMD) (0.654; P = 0.07). The c-statistic for MOF using FRAX-A
conclusionsFRAX-A and FRAX-A
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.