ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2022
Effectiveness of an osteoporosis prevention educational program in Tunisian premenopausal women working in sedentary occupations: a quasi-experimental study.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Knowledge of osteoporosis prevention among health science students in North Africa: a descriptive correlational cross-sectional study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Beliefs and Preventive Practices Regarding Osteoporosis: A Cross-Sectional Study in Community Pharmacies in Tunis.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Health Promotion for Women in the Workplace: A Scoping Review.Public health nursing (Boston, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of an osteoporosis prevention program on knowledge and perception of self-efficacy in adopting preventive osteoporosis behaviors in premenopausal women working in sedentary occupations. Results show the improvement in knowledge and self-efficacy was statistically significant respectively (p < 0.001) and (p = 0.001).
introductionThe main purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an osteoporosis prevention educational program on knowledge and perception of self-efficacy in adopting preventive osteoporosis behaviors in Tunisian premenopausal women working in sedentary occupations.
methodsA quasi-experimental pre-post intervention study design. Our study population was composed of female employees, aged 35-50 years, of a company located in the industrial zone Sousse, situated in the center East of Tunisia. Three data collection methods were used: a questionnaire exploring socio-demographic characteristics and anthropometric measures, the Osteoporosis Knowledge Test, and the Osteoporosis Self-Efficacy Scale. The intervention consisted of an educational program relating to the promotion of calcium intake and physical activity. We are referred to the "Health Belief Model."
resultsA survey conducted on 97 women. Only 81 subjects completed the study and are included in data analyses. The total knowledge score regarding osteoporosis improved by + 14.57 which corresponds to percentage of 109% between the pre- (T1) and post-test (T2). This improvement in knowledge was statistically significant (p < 0.001), going from 13.41 ± 3.94 at T1 to 27.98 ± 2.49 at T2. The total osteoporosis self-efficacy score has increased by + 9.56, or a percentage of 15% between the pre- and post-test. This improvement in self-efficacy was statistically significant (p = 0.001), going from 64.18 ± 20.84 at T1 to 73.73 ± 14.35 at T2.
conclusionIt is important to create an appropriate environment for the adoption of favorable behaviors to healthy bones and to promote health education with political commitment and collaboration with different sectors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35610525What 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.