ReviewCureus2019
Role of Bisphosphonate Therapy in Patients with Osteopenia: A Systemic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medical optimization of osteoporosis for adult spinal deformity surgery: a state-of-the-art evidence-based review of current pharmacotherapy.Spine deformity · 2023Review
- Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaws (MRONJ) in Children and Young Patients-A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Immunotherapy as a treatment to confront the ongoing opioid epidemic- A review.Journal of cellular and molecular immunology · 2022Article
- Analyses of the association between cervical cancer and osteoporosis/osteoporotic fracture: a cross-sectional study using KoGES HEXA data.International journal of clinical oncology · 2021Article
- Pharmacologic intervention for prevention of fractures in osteopenic and osteoporotic postmenopausal women: Systemic review and meta-analysis.Bone reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
By contrast to clinical trials exploring osteoporosis, clinical trials specifically designed for the osteopenic population are limited. Thus, less clinical data are available regarding treatment benefits and cost-effectiveness of treating a patient population with a bone mass density in the osteopenic range (T-score between -1 and -2.5). In this article, we aimed to highlight this high-risk population with a low bone mass density (BMD) susceptible to high fracture risk by reviewing different national and international guidelines for treating osteopenia. The cost-effectiveness of the therapy for the above-mentioned patient population is also discussed. By reviewing different clinical trials, we have specifically highlighted the role of bisphosphonate therapy for fracture risk reduction and increment in bone mineral density (BMD) in patients with osteopenia.
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.