ArticleBeijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences2019
[Evaluation of screening accuracy on osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians and its cut-off value in healthy physical examination population].
Article in Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences, 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore the screening value of osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians (OSTA) and the optimal cut-off value in Chinese healthy physical examination population.
methodsWe selected a healthy physical examination population for bone mineral density screening at the Health Examination Center in Peking University Third Hospital from 2013 to 2016. Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) results were used as the gold standard, and T value ≤-2.5 was defined as osteoporosis patients. Diagnostic test methods were used to analyze the sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio and area under curve (AUC) of different cut points of OSTA. The screening accuracy of OSTA at different cut points was compared and the optimal cut-point value determined.
resultsA total of 5 833 subjects were included in the study, with an average age of (48.3±17.5) years and 2 594 women (44.5%). The QUS test showed 403 patients with osteoporosis (6.9% of the total population), 343 female osteoporosis patients (13.22% of the female population). In the whole age group, AUC at the international routine cut-off value (OSTA ≤-1) screening for osteoporosis was 0.815 (95%CI: 0.804-0.825), and screening accuracy was higher in the women (AUC=0.837, 95%CI: 0.823-0.851) than that in the men (AUC=0.767, 95%CI: 0.752-0.781; P<0.05). In the whole age group, when the optimal cut-off value was 0, its AUC 0.842 (95%CI: 0.832-0.851) was significantly higher than that when the cut-off value was -1 (P<0.01), and net reclassification improvement (NRI) increased by 5.5%. In the 40 to 65-year-old group, when OSTA cut-off value ≤0, the screening accuracy was significantly higher (NRI=19.5%, P=0.003) than that when it was -1.
conclusionThe OSTA screening tool had good osteoporosis screening value in healthy people, and the screening accuracy in women is higher than that in men. Increasing the screening cut-off value of OSTA would be helpful to improve the screening accuracy in the whole and 40 to 65-year-old population. There may be different optimal cut-off values for different age group population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31848509PMC7433592W2997284828What 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.