ArticleArchives of rheumatology2019
Bone Mineral Loss and Fracture in Sarcoidosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Archives of rheumatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osteoporotic bone fracture risk assessment in Latvian patients with newly diagnosed sarcoidosis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2024Article
- Safety of corticosteroid therapy in sarcoidosis treatment.Frontiers in drug safety and regulation · 2023Review
- Osseous manifestations of sarcoidosis.Reumatologia · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis meta-analysis aims to investigate the possibility of bone mineral loss and fracture in sarcoidosis. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases was performed from inception through August 2017. The inclusion criterion was observational studies evaluating the association between sarcoidosis and bone mineral density (BMD) or fracture. The pooled odds ratio (OR) of fracture, standardized mean difference (SMD) of volumetric BMD and areal BMD, and their 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects meta-analysis to compare risk between sarcoidosis and controls. The between-study heterogeneity of effect-size was quantified using the Q statistic and I2.
resultsData were extracted from 10 studies involving a total of 6,448 sarcoidosis patients and 77,857 controls. The pooled result demonstrated no significant increased risk of fracture in sarcoidosis patients compared with controls (OR=1.68; 95% CI: 0.85-3.31, p value=0.14, I2=72%). There were no differences between the patients and controls in areal BMD (SMD= 0.21 g/cm2; 95% CI: -0.12-0.54, p value= 0.22, I2=0%) or volumetric BMD (SMD= 0.04 mg/cm3; 95% CI: -0.51-0.58, p value=0.89, I2=83%).
conclusionOur study has not shown an increased risk of fracture or bone mineral loss in sarcoidosis. However, based on the currently available studies with heterogeneity in between, the conclusion for the osteoporosis screening and fracture risk assessment of patients with sarcoidosis cannot be drawn until more studies are available.
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.