ArticleEndocrine2021
Comparison of methods to improve fracture risk assessment in chinese diabetic postmenopausal women: a case-control study.
Article in Endocrine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fracture events associated with GLP-1 receptor agonists in FDA adverse events reporting system.Acta diabetologica · 2025Article
- Association of C-peptide level with bone mineral density in type 2 diabetes mellitus.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023Article
- Comparison of bone mineral density and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool in Saudi women with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus: A cross-sectional study.Saudi medical journal · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Quality and Bone Microstructure Alterations in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study evaluated the predictive power of adjusted FRAX and standard FRAX models based on the actual prevalence of osteoporosis in type 2 diabetic (T2DM) postmenopausal women, and to explore the optimal strategy to better predicted fracture risk in postmenopausal women with diabetes in China.
methodsWe recruited 434 patients from community-medical centers, 217 with T2DM and 217 without T2DM (non-T2DM). All participants completed self-reported questionnaires detailing their characteristics and risk factors. Bone mineral density (BMD) and spinal radiographs were evaluated. The China FRAX model calculated all scores. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for predicting 10-year risk for major (MOF) and hip (OHF) osteoporotic fractures in T2DM patients.
resultsT2DM patients had higher BMD but lower average FRAX values than non-T2DM patients. The unadjusted FRAX ROC-AUC was 0.774, significantly smaller than that for 0.5-unit femoral neck T-score-adjusted FRAX (0.800; p = 0.004). Rheumatoid arthritis (RA; AUC = 0.810, p = 0.033) and T-score (AUC = 0.816, p = 0.002) adjustments significantly improved fracture prediction in T2DM patients.
conclusionsFemoral neck T-score adjustment might be the preferred method for predicting MOF and OHF in Chinese diabetic postmenopausal women, while RA adjustment only effectively predicted HF risk.
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.