ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2021
A surrogate FRAX model for Pakistan.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- GRADE-ADOLOPMENT of clinical practice guideline for postmenopausal osteoporosis management-a Pakistani context.Archives of osteoporosis · 2023Guideline
- A surrogate FRAX model for Mongolia.Archives of osteoporosis · 2025Article
- Cemented Modular Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures in the Elderly.Cureus · 2024Article
- Age-dependent FRAX-based assessment and intervention thresholds for therapeutic decision making in osteoporosis in the Malaysian population.Archives of osteoporosis · 2024Article
- Reverse engineering the FRAX algorithm: Clinical insights and systematic analysis of fracture risk.Bone · 2022Article
- FRAX-based intervention thresholds for Pakistan.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A surrogate FRAX® model for Pakistan has been constructed using age-specific hip fracture rates for Indians living in Singapore and age-specific mortality rates from Pakistan.
introductionFRAX models are frequently requested for countries with little or no data on the incidence of hip fracture. In such circumstances, the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation have recommended the development of a surrogate FRAX model, based on country-specific mortality data but using fracture data from a country, usually within the region, where fracture rates are considered to be representative of the index country.
objectiveThis paper describes the development and characteristics of a surrogate FRAX model for Pakistan.
methodsThe FRAX model used the ethnic-specific incidence of hip fracture in Indian men and women living in Singapore, combined with the death risk for Pakistan.
resultsThe surrogate model gave somewhat lower 10-year fracture probabilities for men and women at all ages compared to the model for Indians from Singapore, reflecting a higher mortality risk in Pakistan. There were very close correlations in fracture probabilities between the surrogate and authentic models (r ≥ 0.998) so that the use of the Pakistan model had little impact on the rank order of risk. It was estimated that 36,524 hip fractures arose in 2015 in individuals over the age of 50 years in Pakistan, with a predicted increase by 214% to 114,820 in 2050.
conclusionThe surrogate FRAX model for Pakistan provides an opportunity to determine fracture probability within the Pakistan population and help guide decisions about treatment.
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.