Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36936595›Full record

ArticleBMJ medicine2022

Effect of competing mortality risks on predictive performance of the QFracture risk prediction tool for major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture: external validation cohort study in a UK primary care population.

Shona J Livingstone, Daniel R Morales, Megan McMinn, Chima Eke, Peter Donnan, Bruce Guthrie

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.2field-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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Osteoporotic bone fracture risk assessment in Latvian patients with newly diagnosed sarcoidosis.Sarcoidosis, vasculitis, and diffuse lung diseases : official journal of WASOG · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shona J LivingstonePopulation Health and Genomics Division, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Daniel R MoralesPopulation Health and Genomics Division, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Megan McMinnCentre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Chima EkeAdvanced Care Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Peter DonnanPopulation Health and Genomics Division, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK.
Bruce GuthrieAdvanced Care Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4191-4880
University of Dundee · GBUniversity of Edinburgh · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To externally evaluate the QFracture risk prediction tool for predicting the risk of major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture. Design: External validation cohort study. Setting: UK primary care population. Linked general practice (Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Gold), mortality registration (Office of National Statistics), and hospital inpatient (Hospital Episode Statistics) data, from 1 January 2004 to 31 March 2016. Participants: 2 747 409 women and 2 684 730 men, aged 30-99 years, with up-to-standard linked data that had passed CPRD checks for at least one year. Main outcome measures: Two outcomes were modelled based on the QFracture: major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture. Major osteoporotic fracture was defined as any hip, distal forearm, proximal humerus, or vertebral crush fracture, from general practice, hospital discharge, and mortality data. The QFracture 10 year predicted risk of major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture was calculated, and performance evaluated versus observed 10 year risk of fracture in the whole population, and in subgroups based on age and comorbidity. QFracture calibration was examined accounting for, and not accounting for, competing risk of mortality from causes other than the major osteoporotic fracture. Results: 2 747 409 women with 95 598 major osteoporotic fractures and 36 400 hip fractures, and 2 684 730 men with 34 321 major osteoporotic fractures and 13 379 hip fractures were included in the analysis. The incidence of all fractures was higher than in the QFracture internal derivation. Competing risk of mortality was more common than fracture from middle age onwards. QFracture discrimination in the whole population was excellent or good for major osteoporotic fracture and hip fracture (Harrell's C statistic in women 0.813 and 0.918, and 0.738 and 0.888 in men, respectively), but was poor to moderate in age subgroups (eg, Harrell's C statistic in women and men aged 85-99 years was 0.576 and 0.624 for major osteoporotic fractures, and 0.601 and 0.637 for hip fractures, respectively). Without accounting for competing risks, QFracture systematically under-predicted the risk of fracture in all models, and more so for major osteoporotic fracture than for hip fracture, and more so in older people. Accounting for competing risks, QFracture still under-predicted the risk of fracture in the whole population, but over-prediction was considerable in older age groups and in people with high comorbidities at high risk of fracture. Conclusions: The QFracture risk prediction tool systematically under-predicted the risk of fracture (because of incomplete determination of fracture rates) and over-predicted the risk in older people and in those with more comorbidities (because of competing mortality). The use of QFracture in its current form needs to be reviewed, particularly in people at high risk of death from other causes.

Indexed as

Musculoskeletal diseasesPreventive medicinePrimary health careRheumatologyRisk management

Identifiers

PMID36936595
PMCPMC9978756
OpenAlexW4307885295

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.