ArticleJournal of bone metabolism2021
The Characteristics of Women with Subsequent Distal Radius Fracture after Initial Distal Radius Fracture.
Article in Journal of bone metabolism, 2021. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics of women with subsequent distal radius fracture (DRF) and to compare bone fragility variables in women with initial and subsequent DRF.
methodsWe enrolled 227 women who experienced DRF (203 women with initial DRF and 24 women with subsequent DRF) between September 2016 and April 2019. We compared demographic characteristics and bone fragility variables, including bone mineral density, trabecular bone score, hip geometry, bicortical thickness of the distal radius, and fracture risk assessment tool (FRAX) scores between the 2 groups. To reduce bias, patients with subsequent DRF were propensity score-matched in a 1:2 manner with patients affected by initial DRF, and additional comparisons were performed.
resultsPatients in the subsequent DRF group were older than those in the initial DRF group, but this difference was not significant (P=0.091). The proportion of patients receiving treatment with osteoporosis medication was significantly higher in the subsequent DRF group (41.7% vs. 19.2%, P=0.011). Bone fragility variables did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. However, the ten-year probability of major osteoporotic fractures based on FRAX scores was significantly higher in patients with subsequent DRF (7.5% vs. 10.8%, P<0.001). Similar results were observed when comparing the propensity score-matched initial and subsequent DRF groups.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that the occurrence of subsequent DRF after initial DRF can be attributed to multiple factors rather than bone fragility alone. Systematic and multidisciplinary management would be helpful in preventing the occurrence of subsequent DRF after the initial DRF.
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.