ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2022
FRAX-based intervention thresholds for Pakistan.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- GRADE-ADOLOPMENT of clinical practice guideline for postmenopausal osteoporosis management-a Pakistani context.Archives of osteoporosis · 2023Guideline
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 at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
We compared, for women in Pakistan, the utility of intervention thresholds either at a T-score ≤ - 2.5 or based on a FRAX probability equivalent to women of average body mass index (BMI) with a prior fragility fracture. Whereas the FRAX-based intervention threshold identified women at high fracture probability, the T-score threshold was less sensitive, and the associated fracture risk decreased markedly with age. PURPOSE: The fracture risk assessment algorithm FRAX® has been recently calibrated for Pakistan, but guidance is needed on how to apply fracture probabilities to clinical practice.
methodsThe age-specific 10-year probabilities of a major osteoporotic fracture were calculated in women with average BMI to determine fracture probabilities at two potential intervention thresholds. The first comprised the age-specific fracture probabilities associated with a femoral neck T-score of - 2.5. The second approach determined age-specific fracture probabilities that were equivalent to a woman with a prior fragility fracture, without bone mineral density (BMD). The parsimonious use of BMD was additionally explored by the computation of upper and lower assessment thresholds for BMD testing.
resultsWhen a BMD T-score ≤ - 2.5 was used as an intervention threshold, FRAX probabilities in women aged 50 years were approximately two-fold higher than in women of the same age but with no risk factors and average BMD. The relative increase in risk associated with the BMD threshold decreased progressively with age such that, at the age of 80 years or more, a T-score of - 2.5 was actually protective. The 10-year probability of a major osteoporotic fracture by age, equivalent to women with a previous fracture, rose with age from 2.1% at the age of 40 years to 17%, at the age of 90 years, and identified women at increased risk at all ages.
conclusionIntervention thresholds based on BMD alone do not effectively target women at high fracture risk, particularly in the elderly. In contrast, intervention thresholds based on fracture probabilities equivalent to a 'fracture threshold' target women at high fracture 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.