Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38015253›Full record

ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2023

A new FRAX model for Brazil.

B H Albergaria, C A F Zerbini, M Lazaretti-Castro, S R Eis, T Vilaca, H Johansson, N C Harvey, E Liu, L Vandenput, M Lorentzon and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Comparison of country-specific FRAX models throughout Latin America: lessons from Costa Rica and Ecuador.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. A surrogate FRAX model for Mongolia.Archives of osteoporosis · 2025
    Article
  5. 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

13 authors.

B H AlbergariaOsteoporosis Research and Diagnosis Center - CEDOES, Vitoria, Brazil.
C A F ZerbiniCentro Paulista de Investigação Clinica, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
M Lazaretti-CastroFederal University of São Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
S R EisOsteoporosis Research and Diagnosis Center - CEDOES, Vitoria, Brazil.
T VilacaMellanby Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
H JohanssonMary McKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
N C HarveyMRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
E LiuMary McKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
L VandenputMary McKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
M LorentzonMary McKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia.
M SchiniMellanby Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
E McCloskeyMellanby Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Oncology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
J A KanisMary McKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. w.j.Pontefract@sheffield.ac.uk.

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_21003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fracture probabilities derived from the original FRAX model for Brazil were compared to those from an updated model based on more recent regional estimates of the incidence of hip fracture. Fracture probabilities were consistently lower in the updated FRAX model. Despite large differences between models, differences in the rank order of fracture probabilities were minimal.

objectiveRecent epidemiological data indicate that the risk of hip fracture in Brazil is lower than that used to create the original FRAX model. This paper describes the epidemiology of hip fracture in Brazil and the synthesis of an updated FRAX model with the aim of comparing this new model with the original model.

methodsHip fracture rates from three cities in three regions were combined, weighted by the population of each region. For other major fractures, incidence rates for Brazil were estimated using Swedish ratios for hip to other major osteoporotic fracture (humerus, forearm or clinical vertebral fractures). Mortality estimates were taken from the UN.

resultsCompared to the original FRAX model, the updated model gave lower 10-year fracture probabilities in men and women at all ages. Notwithstanding, there was a very close correlation in fracture probabilities between the original and updated models (r > 0.99) so that the revisions had little impact on the rank order of risk.

conclusionThe disparities between the original and updated FRAX models indicate the importance of updating country-specific FRAX models with the advent of significant changes in fracture epidemiology.

Indexed as

Hip FracturesSpinal FracturesBrazilCitiesFemaleForearmHumansMaleEpidemiologyFractureFracture probabilityFRAXHip fracture

Identifiers

PMID38015253
PMCPMC10684424

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.