Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38191760›Full record

SynthesisArchives of osteoporosis2024

Healthcare professionals' perspectives and experiences of osteoporosis medication treatment: a qualitative systematic review.

Fatima Rezae, Ayano Kelly, Sagarika Dey, Rebekah Moles, Stephen Carter

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Archives of osteoporosis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Postoperative osteoporosis therapy and risk of re-fracture in elderly patients with hip fractures: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.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. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Implementing pharmacist-led home medicines reviews within fracture liaison services for better post-fracture care: a qualitative study of patient and practitioner experience.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

5 authors.

Fatima RezaeSchool of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia. fatima.rezae@sydney.edu.au.
Ayano KellyRheumatology Department, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Sagarika DeySchool of Clinical Medicine, South Western Sydney Campus, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Rebekah MolesSchool of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Stephen CarterSchool of Pharmacy, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review aimed to explore healthcare professionals' (HCPs) experiences and perspectives of osteoporosis medication treatment through thematic synthesis of qualitative studies. We found themes about how osteoporosis is perceived as a disease, treatment decision-making and what empowers HCPs to provide the best possible care. PURPOSE: The systematic review aimed to describe the perspectives and experiences of HCPs regarding osteoporosis medication treatment.

methodsWe performed searches in four electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL) from database inception until May 2023 in any language. Data was analysed through inductive thematic synthesis.

resultsWe included 27 primary studies that incorporated the views of 495 different HCPs. The following themes were identified: low-priority disease, challenges in treatment decision-making, minimising drug burden, conscious of communication barriers, fragmented care and advice, confidence through experience and collaboration.

conclusionsHCPs were enthusiastic about optimising osteoporosis care through interprofessional collaboration and expertise, as well as educating and monitoring patients on treatment. They advocated for safety, comfort and reducing overall drug burden, especially in older patients with comorbidities. However, they had differences in opinions regarding who has responsibility for diagnosing and treating osteoporosis and struggled to provide the best possible care due to competing priorities, limited time and lack of adequate knowledge or evidence. The findings highlight the important and complementary role of different HCPs in osteoporosis treatment through a multidisciplinary model of care.

Indexed as

OsteoporosisAgedDatabases, FactualDelivery of Health CareHealth PersonnelHumansLanguageAdherenceHealthcare professionalsMedicationQualitativeReview

Identifiers

PMID38191760

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.