ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2024
Individuals with a fragility fracture and a prescription for bone active medication have a positive perception of the medication but do not associate it with fracture risk reduction.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Living with osteoporosis: a qualitative descriptive study.Archives of osteoporosis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most participants reported a positive perception of bone active medication despite sustaining a fracture while taking the medication, reporting medication side effects, or having a healthcare provider stop the prescription. Participants did not appear to connect the medication to fracture risk, suggesting this connection should be emphasized by healthcare providers.
objectiveOur purpose was to examine perceptions about bone active medication from individuals with a fragility fracture and a prescription for bone active medication.
methodsIn this qualitative description study, eligible participants were those who attended an Osteoporosis Canada education session, and reported sustaining a previous fragility fracture and receiving a prescription for bone active medication. We conducted one-on-one interviews and analyzed the data using the analytic hierarchy approach.
resultsWe interviewed 32 female participants (age range 58-89 years). Based on our analysis, two themes were developed: (1) most participants spoke positively about bone active medication, indicating they were willing to start, or continue to take, their medication. Positive perceptions were held by participants who sustained a fracture while taking bone active medication, participants whose healthcare provider had stopped the prescription, and participants who reported side effects from the medication; (2) most participants did not discuss bone active medication in relation to their fracture and did not appear to connect the medication to the concept of fracture risk. Instead, participants talked about the medication in relation to bone health in general, or to bone density.
conclusionParticipants appeared to have positive perceptions of bone active medication, despite sustaining a fracture while taking the medication, reporting medication side effects, or having a healthcare provider stop the prescription. Participants did not connect bone active medication to the concept of fracture risk, illustrating the need for healthcare providers to emphasize the connection between fracture risk and bone active medication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39352415What 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.