ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2021
Differences in the roles of types 1 and 2 diabetes in the susceptibility to the risk of fracture: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus: comprehensive fracture risk relationships in UK Biobank.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2025Article
- Review
- Article
- Review
- Trabecular Bone Score (TBS) in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: An Updated Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Diabetic microvascular disease in non-classical beds: the hidden impact beyond the retina, the kidney, and the peripheral nerves.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Review
- Reduced High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Is an Independent Determinant of Altered Bone Quality in Women with Type 2 Diabetes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Observational
- The Gut-Bone Axis in Diabetes.Current osteoporosis reports · 2023Review
- Fractures and dislocations of the foot and ankle in people with diabetes: a literature review.Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism · 2023Review
- The relationship between the monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio and osteoporosis in postmenopausal females with T2DM: A retrospective study in Chinese population.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) causes excess risk of fracture at varied sites. Whereas, the difference between the roles of types 1 DM (T1DM) and 2 DM (T2DM) diabetes in the risk of fractures remains limited and inconclusive. We, therefore, conducted a meta-analysis to assess the differences for the associations of T1DM and T2DM with the risk of fractures.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library for eligible studies until May 2021. The odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to calculate the pooled effect estimates for the associations of T1DM and T2DM with the risk of fractures using the random-effects model. An indirect comparison results for the ratio of OR (ROR) with 95% CI were also applied to assess the difference between T1DM and T2DM with the risk of fractures.
resultsTwenty-two cohort studies involving a total of 6,484,851 individuals were selected for meta-analysis. We noted that T1DM was associated with an increased risk of all fractures (OR: 1.72; 95% CI 1.36-2.19; P < 0.001), and fractures at the hip (OR: 4.01; 95% CI 2.90-5.54; P < 0.001), upper arm (OR: 2.20; 95% CI 1.61-3.00; P < 0.001), ankle (OR: 1.97; 95% CI 1.24-3.14; P = 0.004), and vertebrae (OR: 2.18; 95% CI 1.85-2.57; P < 0.001). Moreover, T2DM induced excess risk to all fractures (OR: 1.19; 95% CI 1.09-1.31; P < 0.001), including fractures at the hip (OR: 1.25; 95% CI 1.15-1.35; P < 0.001), upper arm (OR: 1.42; 95% CI 1.20-1.67; P < 0.001), and ankle (OR: 1.15; 95% CI 1.01-1.31; P = 0.029). Furthermore, we noted that T1DM versus T2DM was associated with greater risk to all fractures (ROR: 1.45; 95% CI 1.12-1.87; P = 0.005), including fractures at the hip (ROR: 3.21; 95% CI 2.30-4.48; P < 0.001), upper arm (ROR: 1.55; 95% CI 1.09-2.20; P = 0.015), and ankle (ROR: 1.71; 95% CI 1.06-2.78; P = 0.029).
conclusionsThis study found that T1DM caused an excess risk to all fractures, including fractures at the hip, upper arm, and ankle than T2DM. Further studies should therefore be conducted to directly compare the differences between T1DM and T2DM with the risk of fractures at various sites.
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.