Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34124845›Full record

SynthesisOrthopaedic surgery2021

Exercise vs Conventional Treatment for Treatment of Primary Osteoporosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Yan Yan, Biao Tan, Fanyu Fu, Qianglong Chen, Wenlong Li, Weiheng Chen, Haijun He

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Orthopaedic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Does adding exercise or physical activity to pharmacological osteoporosis therapy in patients with increased fracture risk improve bone mineral density and lower fracture risk? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Osteoporosis therapy using nanoparticles: a review.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Yan Yan *Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7539-5268
Biao Tan *Wangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7262-9850
Fanyu FuDepartment of Pain, The Second People's Hospital of Yibin City, Yibin, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1841-7379
Qianglong ChenGuizhou university of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Guiyang, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4892-0725
Wenlong LiThe Third Affiliated Hospital of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China .ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6156-3390
Weiheng ChenThe Third Affiliated Hospital of Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China .ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0831-1201
Haijun HeWangjing Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6954-5701
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNBeijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNGuiyang College of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNSecond People’s Hospital of Yibin · CN

Funding

National Key Research and Development Program-Demonstration study of TCM "preventive treatment of disease" intervention technology for people at high risk of osteoporosis 2018YFC1704703National Natural Science Foundation of China 81873322
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePhysical exercise has obvious effects on bone loss, pain relief, and improvement of bone metabolism indexes in patients with osteoporosis, but currently lacks sufficient evidence. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize and present the best available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of exercises in the treatment of primary osteoporosis.

methodsPublications pertaining to the effectiveness of exercise on bone mineral density (BMD), visual analog scores (VAS), and biochemical markers of bone metabolism in primary osteoporosis (POP) from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, VIP, CNKI, and Wanfang Database were retrieved from their inception to April 2020.

resultsA total of 20 studies with 1824 participants were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that exercise therapy for lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD is statistically different from conventional therapy (lumbar spine BMD: SMD = 0.78, 95%CI: 0.46, 1.10, P < 0.00001, I

conclusionsKinesitherapy significantly improved lumbar spine and femoral neck BMD, and relieve the pain of patients in the current low-quality evidence. Additional high-quality evidence is required to confirm the effect of exercise therapy on the biochemical markers of bone metabolism in POP patients.

Indexed as

BiomarkersBone DensityBone Density Conservation AgentsCombined Modality TherapyExercise TherapyHumansOsteoporosisPain MeasurementRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicBiomarkersBone Density Conservation AgentsBone metabolismBone mineral densityKinesitherapyPrimary osteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID34124845
PMCPMC8313149
OpenAlexW3173066692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.