ArticleIrish journal of medical science2024
Knowledge gap in a cross section of Irish general practitioners prescribing denosumab for osteoporosis.
Article in Irish journal of medical science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Osteoporosis and post-fracture management in the primary care setting: a systematic review.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Review
- Utilization and expenditure on medicines for the management of osteoporosis in Ireland: A repeated cross-sectional study.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDenosumab is commonly used by general practitioners (GPs) in Ireland to treat osteoporosis though drug holidays are not recommended with rebound bone loss and risk of vertebral fractures if stopped. We aimed to investigate GP practice and knowledge regarding denosumab including use and reasons for use, therapy duration, blood monitoring and recommended vitamin D status/calcium intake on treatment, staff administering, methods of recall, delays in receiving injections, management of and awarenes of guidelines if stopped, reasons for stopping and concerns about same.
methodsGPs were contacted (n = 846) by email and invited to complete an online anonymous survey comprising 25 questions in January 2022. We collated responses and explored for differences between GP principals/trainers and GP trainees.
resultsThere were 146 responses. Sixty-seven percent were female and 50% were GP principal/trainers. Forty-three percent used denosumab as a first line therapy citing convenience in 32% of cases. Half (50%) envisaged therapy for 3-5 years and 15% lifelong use. A fifth (21%) had no concerns about it being stopped (11% trainors vs 31% trainees, P = 0.002). If stopped, 41% cited opting for a drug holiday with monitoring. Forty percent of GPs gave patients a reminder card for the next injection and 27% had an alert system.
conclusionWe identified a knowledge gap in denosumab prescribing among a sample of Irish GPs. Findings suggest a need for education to increase awareness around denosumab use and to consider recall systems in GP practices as suggested elsewhere to ensure persistence with therapy.
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.