ArticleBone reports2019
FRAX (Australia) scores in women with impaired fasting glucose and diabetes.
Article in Bone reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Comparison of Trabecular Bone Score-Adjusted Fracture Risk Assessment (TBS-FRAX) and FRAX Tools for Identification of High Fracture Risk among Taiwanese Adults Aged 50 to 90 Years with or without Prediabetes and Diabetes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Article
- Fracture risk assessment in diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes is associated with higher fracture risk despite higher bone mineral density (BMD), with FRAX® underestimating risk. This study aimed to investigate FRAX score with and without BMD for women with normoglycaemia, impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and diabetes.
methodsAmong 566 women, aged 40-90 years, enrolled in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, IFG was defined as fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥5.5 mmol/L and diabetes as FPG ≥ 7.0 mmol/L, use of antihyperglycaemic medication and/or self-report. FRAX (Australia) 10-year probabilities of major osteoporotic (MOF) and hip fracture were calculated, with and without BMD, producing four FRAX scores per participant. Kruskal-Wallis test for non-parametric data was used to examine differences between the three glycaemia groups. Fractures over 10 years were ascertained using radiological reports. The number of fractures predicted by FRAX was compared with the number of fractures observed using Chi-square tests.
resultsFor MOF FRAX calculated without BMD, women with diabetes (
conclusionsCompared with women who had normoglycaemia or IFG, women with diabetes tended to have a higher FRAX score for both MOF and hip fractures when BMD was not included. When BMD was included, there was no difference. Fractures in diabetes tended to be underestimated by FRAX with BMD. This suggests that FRAX calculations including BMD may not be accurate for estimating fractures in those with diabetes.
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.