ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2023
Osteoporosis: Investigations and Monitoring.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The FGF23/α-Klotho Axis in Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: Associations with Bone Mineral Density and Diagnostic Discrimination.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Brown Tumors: The Hidden Face of Primary and Renal Hyperparathyroidism Amid Real-Life Settings.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Osteoporosis is characterized by microarchitectural disruption of the bone, decrease in bone mineral density, and increased skeletal fragility and risk of fracture. Osteoporosis occurs due to the decoupling of bone formation and bone resorption, with a significant increase in resorption. This review article focuses on the role of laboratory investigations in the diagnosis and monitoring of treatment in patients with osteoporosis. Methods: This review article collected literature from various databases using keywords such as 'Laboratory investigations', 'Osteoporosis', 'Diagnosis', 'Monitoring', and 'Bone turnover markers'. Results and Discussion: Laboratory investigations, including serum calcium, alkaline phosphatase, vitamin D, and parathormone, are commonly performed tests to exclude secondary causes of osteoporosis and monitor the response to therapy. The biochemical markers of bone turnover are newly emerged tests for monitoring individual patients with osteoporosis. These markers are classified as bone formation and resorption markers, measurable in both serum and urine. The use of these markers is limited by biological and analytical variability. The International Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine and the International Osteoporosis Foundation recommend serum procollagen type 1 amino-terminal propeptide as the bone formation marker and β-form of C-terminal cross-linked telopeptide of type I collagen (β-CTx-1/β-CrossLaps) as the marker of choice, using standardized procedures. However, in specific cases, such as patients with chronic renal disease, CTx-1 is replaced by the resorption marker tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b, as its levels are not affected by renal excretion. Conclusion: Bone turnover markers have emerged as tools for the assessment of osteoporosis, using standardized procedures, and are useful in monitoring therapy and treatment compliance.
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.