Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38267665›Full record

ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2024

Establishing consensus recommendations for long-term osteoporosis care for patients who have attended an Australian fracture liaison service: a Delphi study.

Michael J Bennett, Jacqueline R Center, Lin Perry

Abstract readConsensus Statement
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, 2024. 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. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Patient education following vertebral fragility fracture: a scoping review.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
  5. 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

3 authors.

Michael J BennettDepartment of Endocrinology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Randwick, NSW, Australia. michael.j.bennett@unsw.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4320-2684
Jacqueline R CenterThe Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Lin PerryFaculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coordinating healthcare activities between fracture liaison services (FLS) and primary care is challenging. Using a Delphi technique, we developed 34 consensus statements to support improved care coordination across this healthcare transition. PURPOSE: Evidence supporting an optimal coordination strategy between fracture liaison services (FLS) and primary care is lacking. This study aimed to develop consensus statements to support consistency and benchmarking of clinical practice to improve coordination of care for patients transitioning from FLS to primary care following an osteoporotic fracture.

methodsA Delphi technique was used to develop consensus among a panel of experts, including FLS clinicians (medical and non-medical), general practitioners (GPs), and consumers.

resultsResults of a preparatory questionnaire (n = 33) informed the development of 34 statements for review by expert panellists over two Delphi rounds (n = 25 and n = 19, respectively). The majority of participants were from New South Wales (82%), employed as FLS clinicians (78.8%) and working in metropolitan centres (60.6%). Consensus was achieved for 24/34 statements in round one and 8/10 statements in round two. All statements concerning patient education, communication, and the GP-patient relationship achieved consensus. Expert opinions diverged in some areas of clinician roles and responsibilities and long-term monitoring and management recommendations.

conclusionWe found clear consensus among experts in many key areas of FLS integration with primary care. While experts agreed that primary care is the most appropriate setting for long-term osteoporosis care, overall confidence in primary care systems to achieve this was low. The role of (and responsibility for) adherence monitoring in a resource-limited setting remains to be defined.

Indexed as

OsteoporosisOsteoporotic FracturesTransition to Adult CareAustraliaDelphi TechniqueHumansFracture liaison serviceHealthcare integrationImplementation scienceOsteoporosisPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID38267665
PMCPMC10867051

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.