ArticleJournal of the Endocrine Society2024
Geographic Variation in Osteoporosis Treatment in Postmenopausal Women: A 15-Year Longitudinal Analysis.
Article in Journal of the Endocrine Society, 2024. 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.
- Geographical variation in osteoporosis in Australian women: a longitudinal analysis over 23 years.Archives of osteoporosis · 2024Article
- Geographic Variation in Osteoporosis Treatment in Postmenopausal Women: A 15-Year Longitudinal Analysis.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Osteoporosis affects more than half of older women, but many are not treated. Whether treatment differs between rural and urban areas is unknown. Objective: To examine differences in osteoporosis treatment among postmenopausal women living in urban and rural areas of Australia. Methods: Women participating in the Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health, a prospective longitudinal cohort study, born between 1946-1951, and with osteoporosis or fractures, were included. Surveys from 2004 to 2019 were linked to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (government-subsidized medications) to assess osteoporosis treatment and adherence, comparing geographical areas. Results: Of the 4259 women included (mean age, 55.6 years), 1703 lived in major cities, 1629 inner regional, 794 outer regional, and 133 remote areas. Over the 15-year follow-up, 1401 (32.9%) women received treatment, including 47.4% of women with osteoporosis and 29.9% with fractures. Women in outer regional and remote areas were less likely to use antiosteoporosis treatment than those in major cities on univariable analysis (outer regional odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.95; remote, 0.65; 0.49-0.86), but this did not remain significant on multivariable analysis. Median duration of use was 10 to 36 months, adherence varied by treatment type (34%-100%) but was not related to incident fractures, and of the women who stopped denosumab, 85% did not receive another consolidating treatment. Conclusions: One-third of women with osteoporosis/fractures received treatment, and adherence was low. There was no difference in treatment use between urban and rural areas after adjusting for risk factors, although the specific treatment used, and adherence, differed.
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.