Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37294333›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2023

Research priorities regarding the use of bisphosphonates for osteoporosis: a UK priority setting exercise.

Zoe Paskins, Alice Moult, Nadia Corp, Anastasios Bastounis, Sarah Davis, Melanie Jay Narayanasamy, Jill Griffin, Neil Gittoes, Jo Leonardi-Bee, Tessa Langley and 2 more

Abstract 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, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Zoe PaskinsSchool of Medicine, Keele University, David Weatherall Building, Newcastle-Under-Lyme, ST5 5BG, UK. z.paskins@keele.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7783-2986
Alice MoultSchool of Medicine, Keele University, David Weatherall Building, Newcastle-Under-Lyme, ST5 5BG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9424-5660
Nadia CorpSchool of Medicine, Keele University, David Weatherall Building, Newcastle-Under-Lyme, ST5 5BG, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6758-9513
Anastasios BastounisFaculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, City Hospital, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5861-9373
Sarah DavisSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6609-4287
Melanie Jay NarayanasamyNottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3483-0777
Jill GriffinRoyal Osteoporosis Society (ROS), St James House, The Square, Lower Bristol Road, BA2 3BH, UK.
Neil GittoesCentre for Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5963-214X
Jo Leonardi-BeeCentre for Evidence Based Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0893-6068
Tessa LangleyFaculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9560-1148
Simon BishopNottingham University Business School, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, NG8 1BB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8527-7081
Opinder SahotaDepartment of Healthcare of Older People, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0055-7637
University of Nottingham · GBHaywood Community Hospital · GBKeele University · GBNottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBRoyal Osteoporosis Society · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWorldwide, many people who would benefit from osteoporosis drugs are not offered or receiving them, resulting in an osteoporosis care gap. Adherence with bisphosphonates is particularly low. This study aimed to identify stakeholder research priorities relating to bisphosphonate treatment regimens for prevention of osteoporotic fractures.

methodsA three-step approach based on the James Lind Alliance methodology for identification and prioritisation of research questions was used. Research uncertainties were gathered from a large programme of related research studies about bisphosphonate regimens and from recent published international clinical guidelines. Clinical and public stakeholders refined the list of uncertainties into research questions. The third step prioritised the questions using a modified nominal group technique.

resultsIn total, 34 draft uncertainties were finalised into 33 research questions by stakeholders. The top 10 includes questions relating to which people should be offered intravenous bisphosphonates first line (1); optimal duration of treatment (2); the role of bone turnover markers in treatment breaks (3); support patient need for medicine optimisation (4); support primary care practitioner need regarding bisphosphonates (5); comparing zoledronate given in community vs hospital settings (6); ensuring quality standards are met (7); the long-term model of care (8); best bisphosphonate for people aged under 50 (9); and supporting patient decision-making about bisphosphonates (10).

conclusionThis study reports, for the first time, topics of importance to stakeholders in the research of bisphosphonate osteoporosis treatment regimens. These findings have implications for research into implementation to address the care gap and education of healthcare professionals. Using James Lind Alliance methodology, this study reports prioritised topics of importance to stakeholders in the research of bisphosphonate treatment in osteoporosis. The priorities address how to better implement guidelines to address the care gap, understanding patient factors influencing treatment selection and effectiveness, and how to optimise long-term care.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchOsteoporosisAgedDiphosphonatesHumansPatient SelectionUnited KingdomDiphosphonatesBisphosphonatesOsteoporosisResearch prioritiesStakeholder

Identifiers

PMID37294333
OpenAlexW4379966710

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.