Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30680431›Full record

Observational studyOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2019

Risk of imminent fracture following a previous fracture in a Swedish database study.

J Banefelt, K E Åkesson, A Spångéus, O Ljunggren, L Karlsson, O Ström, G Ortsäter, C Libanati, E Toth

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study 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 76 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Risk factors for subsequent vertebral fracture after acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures.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 · 2021
    Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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 · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Clinical implementation of AI for vertebral fracture detection in CT aligned with fracture liaison services: high prevalence of undiagnosed vertebral fractures.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Observational
  14. Impact of a national reimbursement add-on policy on refracture risk and secondary fracture prevention after hip fracture in Japan: a population-based interrupted time series analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Impact of a national reimbursement policy on anti-osteoporosis medication prescription at discharge after hip-fracture surgery in Japan: an interrupted time-series analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

J BanefeltQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
K E ÅkessonDepartment of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Clinical and Molecular Osteoporosis Research, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden.
A SpångéusLinköping University, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden.
O LjunggrenDepartment of Medical Sciences, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
L KarlssonQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
O StrömQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
G OrtsäterQuantify Research, Stockholm, Sweden.
C LibanatiUCB Biopharma Sprl, Allée de la Recherche 60, 1070, Brussels, Belgium.
E TothUCB Biopharma Sprl, Allée de la Recherche 60, 1070, Brussels, Belgium. emese.toth@ucb.com.

Funding

UCB Pharma N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study examined the imminent risk of a future fracture within 1 and 2 years following a first fracture in women aged 50 years and older and assessed independent factors associated with risk of subsequent fractures. The study highlights the need to intervene rapidly after a fracture to prevent further fractures.

introductionThis study aims to determine the imminent risk of subsequent fractures within 1 and 2 years following a first fracture and to assess independent factors associated with subsequent fractures.

methodsRetrospective, observational cohort study of women aged ≥ 50 years with a fragility fracture was identified from Swedish national registers. Clinical/demographic characteristics at the time of index fracture and cumulative fracture incidences up to 12 and 24 months following index fracture were calculated. Risk factors for subsequent fracture were identified using multivariate regression analysis.

resultsTwo hundred forty-two thousand one hundred eight women (mean [SD] age 74 [12.5] years) were included. The cumulative subsequent fracture incidence at 12 months was 7.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9-7.2) and at 24 months was 12.0% (95% CI, 11.8-12.1). The rate of subsequent fractures was highest in the first month (~ 15 fractures per 1000 patient-years) and remained steady between 4 and 24 months (~ 5 fractures/1000 patient-years). Higher age was an independent risk factor for imminent subsequent fractures (at 24 months, sub-distribution hazard ratio [HR], 3.07; p < 0.001 for women 80-89 years [reference 50-59 years]). Index vertebral fracture was a strong independent risk factor for subsequent fracture (sub-distribution HR, 2.72 versus hip fracture; p < 0.001 over 12 months; HR, 2.23; p < 0.001 over 24 months).

conclusionsOur findings highlight the need to intervene rapidly after any fragility fracture in postmenopausal women. The occurrence of a fragility fracture provides healthcare systems with a unique opportunity to intervene to reduce the increased risk of subsequent fractures.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsComorbidityDatabases, FactualFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedOsteoporosis, PostmenopausalOsteoporotic FracturesRecurrenceRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSwedenFracture riskFragility fractureNear-termOsteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID30680431
PMCPMC6422949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.