ArticleBMJ open2019
Evaluation of the increased risk of spine fracture in patients with mood disorder compared with matched controls: a longitudinal follow-up study using a national sample cohort in Korea.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectiveTo evaluate the risk of spine fracture in patients with mood disorder using a nationwide cohort.
designA longitudinal follow-up study.
settingClaims data for the population ≥20 years of age were collected from 2002 to 2013 for the Korean National Health Insurance Service-National Sample Cohort.
participantsA total of 60 140 individuals with mood disorder were matched with 240 560 individuals (control group) for age, sex, income, region of residence and osteoporosis.
interventionsIn both the mood disorder and control groups, the history of spine fracture was evaluated. The International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision codes for mood disorder (F31-F39) and spine fracture (S220 and S320) were included. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The univariable and multivariable HRs and 95% CIs of spine fracture for patients with mood disorder were analysed using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the history of osteoporosis, age and sex.
resultsApproximately 3.3% (2011/60 140) of patients in the mood disorder group and 2.8% (6795/240 560) of individuals in the control group had spine fracture (p<0.001). The mood disorder group demonstrated a higher adjusted HR for spine fracture than the control group (multivariable HR=1.10, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.15, p<0.001). The participants without osteoporosis showed a higher HR of mood disorder for spine fracture than the control participants (multivariable HR=1.25, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.37, p<0.001). According to age and sex, this result was consistent in subgroups of women aged 20-39 and 40-59 years and men aged ≥60 years.
conclusionThe risk of spine fracture was increased in patients with mood disorder. The potential risk of spine fracture needs to be evaluated when managing patients with mood disorder.
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.