Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38596506›Full record

ArticleJBMR plus2024

It is not "just a fracture".

Peggy M Cawthon, Matthew Drake

Open access · goldAbstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in JBMR plus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 96% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peggy M CawthonResearch Institute, California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, United States 94143.
Matthew DrakeDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, United States.
California Pacific Medical Center · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In their recent population-based study of nearly 100 000 patients from Ontario, Canada, who had suffered a fracture, Vincent et al. characterized postfracture survival rates. Their findings showed that overall survival was decreased particularly following fractures of the hip or vertebrae, and was worse in men and the oldest old. They found that relative survival, particularly after hip fracture, is strikingly poor with less than one-third of men and one-half of women surviving for 5 years following hip fracture, survival which was far less than that seen for patients afflicted by both prostate and breast cancers. Importantly, mortality risk increased immediately after fracture occurrence and was highest within 1 month of fracture. Collectively, their data suggest that a short, critical window may exist immediately following fracture in which application of interventions to improve survival is likely to be of greatest value. Future work is urgently needed to identify the best approaches to employ during this critical time period in order to optimize survival in patients who have suffered a fracture.

Indexed as

epidemiologyfracturemortalityosteoporosissurvival

Identifiers

PMID38596506
PMCPMC11001754
OpenAlexW4392015807

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.