ArticleLa Tunisie medicale2024
Article in La Tunisie medicale, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictors of delayed union after surgical treatment in patients with osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Pooled it
- Predicting lower extremity deep vein thrombosis in elderly patients with hip fracture: A machine learning model with emphasis on diabetes as a key risk factor.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2026Article
- Beyond the fracture: coordinated action for bone health equity in Africa.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2026Article
- Knowledge, Beliefs and Preventive Practices Regarding Osteoporosis: A Cross-Sectional Study in Community Pharmacies in Tunis.Nutrients · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate survival after osteoporotic fractures of the upper femur and determine its associated factors.
methodsCross-sectional study of patients hospitalized for fractures of the upper end of the femur during 2020 at Monastir University Hospital. Outcome was determined up to 2 years. The Kaplan-Meier curve is used for survival analysis.
resultsEighty one patients with mean age of 77.46 ± 17,36 years and a sex ratio of 0.61 were evaluated. The femoral neck fracture was observed in54% of cases. Overall survival was 84.6% at 6 months, 75.4% at 1 year and 63.4% at 2 years. Median survival was 30 months. Patients older than 75 years had a shorter survival (68% versus 83% at one year and 55% versus 72% at 2 years ; p < 10-3).
conclusionThe osteoporotic fracture of the upper femur is serious due to its severe outcome. One-year mortality was aboutt 25%. Increased mortality was associated to elderly population.
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.