ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2024
The use of the FRAX® tool and its adjustments in women living with diabetes: a cohort study in primary care in Brazil.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The FRAX® algorithm showed good accuracy in women living with DM followed in primary care. There were no differences between the ROC curve with and without adjustments for major and hip fractures. The FRAX® 10-year and FRAX® AR were better calibrated in this population. PURPOSE: An increased risk of fractures in people living with diabetes has been described. Screening instruments to calculate this risk have been proposed, including the FRAX® algorithm. Some studies suggest that minor modifications to this instrument can improve its performance. These modifications work well in other countries, but we do not know if they work in Brazil. The objective of our study was to evaluate the performance of the FRAX® algorithm with and without adjustments for women living with DM (WLDM) in primary care in Brazil.
methodsA cohort study that included post-menopausal women attending primary care in Santa Maria, Brazil, was conducted from 2013 to 2018. The risk for major and hip fractures was calculated using the FRAX® tool. The FRAX® risk was calculated: (1) without adjustments (unadjusted FRAX®); (2) increasing the entered age by 10 years in individuals with DM (FRAX® 10 years); and (3) inserting the diagnosis of DM as rheumatoid arthritis (FRAX® AR).
resultsThe accuracy for major fracture was 0.948 (unadjusted FRAX®), 0.947 (FRAX® 10 years), and 0.946 (FRAX® AR). For hip fractures, the accuracies were 0.989 (unadjusted FRAX®), 0.988 (FRAX® 10 years), and 0.988 (FRAX® AR). Furthermore, there were no differences between the area under the ROC curve with and without adjustments for major and hip fractures. Conversely, the FRAX® 10 years and the FRAX® AR were better calibrated, presenting a lower Chi-square.
conclusionThe FRAX® algorithm showed good accuracy in WLDM followed in primary care. The FRAX® 10 years and FRAX® AR were better calibrated in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39738980What 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.