Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34993562›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2022

Evaluating the performance of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) in fracture risk prediction and developing a new Charlson Fracture Index (CFI): a register-based cohort study.

A Clausen, S Möller, M K Skjødt, B H Bech, K H Rubin

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. An electronic health record (EHR)-based risk calculator can predict fractures comparably to FRAX: a proof-of-concept study.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

A ClausenOPEN - Open Patient Data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
S MöllerOPEN - Open Patient Data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
M K SkjødtResearch Unit OPEN, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
B H BechDepartment of Public Health - Department of Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
K H RubinOPEN - Open Patient Data Explorative Network, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. krubin@health.sdu.dk.
Holbæk Sygehus · DKOdense University Hospital · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) may be applicable for predicting fracture risk since several diagnoses from the index are predictors of fracture. Main results were that the CCI was updated to predict risk of hip fracture with fair precision and that the index could be useful in detecting high-risk individuals. PURPOSE: Several of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) diagnoses are validated predictors of fracture. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of the CCI 1987 by Charlson et al. and of the CCI 2011 by Quan et al. in predicting major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) and hip fracture (HF). Furthermore, it was examined whether the index could be modified to improve fracture risk prediction.

methodsThe study population included the entire Danish population aged 45 + years as per January 1, 2018. The cohort was split randomly 50/50 into a development and a validation cohort. CCI diagnoses and fracture outcomes were identified from hospital diagnoses. The weighting of diagnoses was updated in a new Charlson Fracture Index (CFI) using multivariable logistic regression. Predictive capabilities of the CCI 1987, the updated CCI 2011 and the new Charlson Fracture index were evaluated in the validation cohort by receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC).

resultsIn the validation cohort, the 1987 and 2011 CCIs resulted in AUCs below or around 0.7 in prediction of MOF and HF in both sexes. The CFI resulted in AUCs < 0.7 in prediction of MOF in both sexes. In prediction of HF, the CFI resulted in AUC of 0.755 (95% CI 0.749; 0.761) in women and 0.782 (95% CI 0.772; 0.793) in men.

conclusionThe 1987 and 2011 CCIs showed overall poor accuracy in fracture risk prediction. The CFI showed fair accuracy in prediction of HF in women and in men.

Indexed as

Hip FracturesCohort StudiesComorbidityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsAutomated Risk CalculationCCICharlson Comorbidity IndexOsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesRegister data

Identifiers

PMID34993562
OpenAlexW4205103839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.