ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2022
Cost-effectiveness of selective bone densitometry using the osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians in multi-ethnic Asian population.
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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revisiting the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST): evidence from a multi-cohort study in Asia supporting age-dependent thresholds.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Article
- Osteoporosis risk and its association with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among the elderly: a 16-year nationwide cohort study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Osteoporosis in men-East and West: Can the twain meet? A perspective from Asia.Osteoporosis and sarcopenia · 2024Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Early detection and treatment of osteoporosis can help to prevent debilitating fractures in the elderly. The osteoporosis self-assessment tool for Asians can be used as a screening tool to stratify patients for bone densitometry. It is most cost-effective for post-menopausal women aged 70 and males aged 75. PURPOSE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of selective bone densitometry (SBD) using the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA) as a risk-stratifying tool for the three predominant races (Chinese, Malay and Indian) in Singapore.
methodsDecision analytical models were developed using a Markov model. Three scenarios were compared: no bone densitometry, SBD using the OSTA as a pre-screening tool and universal bone densitometry. Those diagnosed with osteoporosis were treated with five years of alendronate therapy. Data sources were from Singapore epidemiological studies, healthcare cost figures and published literature. Measurements include life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER).
resultsCompared to no bone densitometry, SBD using the OSTA would cost between $40,679 and $73,909 per QALY gained for men aged 75-80 and $22,386 to $58,185 per QALY gained for post-menopausal women aged 70-80. Universal bone densitometry would cost $157,955 to $177,127 per QALY gained for men aged 75-80 and $40,179 to $66,112 per QALY gained for post-menopausal women aged 70 to 80 compared to SBD.
conclusionIn general, osteoporosis screening was the most cost-effective for Malays and the least cost-effective for Indians. However, a general guideline should still be applied to the Singaporean population, as further explained later. Overall, the most cost-effective strategy for males would be using OSTA as a risk-stratifying tool at age 75. For post-menopausal women, SBD should be used for women aged 70, while universal bone densitometry should be used for women aged 75-80.
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.