ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Osteoporotic fractures in adults under 65 without prior indications for BMD testing: a call to reevaluate screening guidelines.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence for opportunistic screening of osteoporosis across multiple imaging modalities: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Osteoporosis screening: Are we entering a new era? The point of view of the clinician.European radiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the availability of effective interventions, a substantial number of osteoporosis patients remain underdiagnosed and undertreated, particularly those under 65 years of age. This study aimed to assess the frequency of osteoporotic fractures in patients under 65 years referred to a Fracture Liaison Service (FLS) clinic and to evaluate the applicability of current Bone Mineral Density (BMD) testing guidelines.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of the medical profiles of patients enrolled in the FLS clinic from April 2022 to March 2024. The primary objectives of the study were to determine the proportion of patients seen in an FLS clinic for osteoporotic fractures who did not meet usual criteria for bone density screening, and amongst those patients, the number whose bone density measurements would have resulted in a diagnosis of osteoporosis. The secondary objectives of the study were the frequency of different BMD indications in this population and the impact of T-score Range and Age Threshold on Fracture Detection.
resultsAmong the 1,248 patients analyzed, 772 (61.9%) were under 65 years. Of these, only 34% had indications for BMD testing according to the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) guidelines. Fragility fractures after age 40, smoking and diseases associated with bone loss were the most frequent underlying conditions, justifying the BMD testing. (Respectively 143 (18.4%), 178 (22.4%), 139 (18%))
conclusionsA significant proportion of patients under 65 years with fragility fractures do not meet current BMD testing criteria, potentially leading to unrecognized osteoporosis and subsequent fractures. This underscores the urgent need to revise osteoporosis screening guidelines to better identify at-risk individuals, thereby reducing the burden of fragility fractures.
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.