ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2025
OsteoStrong and bone health: a scoping review.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2025. 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.
- The effect of OsteoStrong compared to dynamic multicomponent exercise on bone strength in older women: the BONEMORE non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.Archives of osteoporosis · 2026Trial
- Approach to personalizing the treatment of osteoporosis.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2026Review
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
purposeOsteostrong proposes that exercise on proprietary machines once weekly for 10 minutes increases bone mineral density. Because OsteoStrong franchises are open/opening in multiple countries, healthcare providers must be able to answer questions about OsteoStrong's efficacy and safety. Our objective was to synthesize current research on the efficacy and safety of OsteoStrong for healthcare providers who must be able to answer patients' questions about OsteoStrong's efficacy and safety.
methodsWe conducted a rapid scoping review with searches in five databases. We included studies in English involving OsteoStrong machines, in any population and using any comparator, that measured falls, fractures, or bone strength. Screening and data abstraction were completed by two independent reviewers using Covidence. We used tables and descriptive statistics to chart data.
resultsThe search resulted in 1388 studies and nine were included; five were abstracts or unpublished. Seven studies were observational studies (e.g., case study/series, non-randomized trial) and two were randomized trials comparing OsteoStrong to exercise. There were no randomized controlled trials comparing OsteoStrong to a control group. Most studies had small sample sizes and potential conflicts of interest. The two largest studies included individuals on concurrent anti-resorptive treatment. Two of the trials reported on fractures, falls, or adverse events. Most trials reported on bone mineral density (BMD) at the lumbar spine and proximal femur. Effects on BMD were inconsistent across trials.
conclusionsThe research on OsteoStrong is mainly limited to small observational studies that are at risk of bias because of conflict of interest, imprecision, publication in a predatory journal, participants on anti-resorptive medications, or poor-quality research reporting. The effects of OsteoStrong on bone strength outcomes are inconsistent, and currently there is little data on safety of this intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40691713What 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.