ArticleThe Eurasian journal of medicine2025
Investigation of Q Angle and Related Factors in Osteoporosis Patients.
Article in The Eurasian journal of medicine, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to examine the Q angle in patients diagnosed with osteoporosis, osteopenia, and osteoarthritis and to compare the groups with each other. Methods: This study included 22 female patients diagnosed with osteoporosis, 22 female patients diagnosed with osteopenia, and 22 female patients diagnosed with osteoarthritis, aged 40-65 years. Q angle, pain, lower extremity muscle strength, foot posture, and pes planus were assessed using a goniometer, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Medical Research Council (MRC) Scale, Foot Posture Index (FPI), and Navicular Drop Test (NDT), respectively. Results: There was a statistical difference in both right and left Q angle in osteoporosis compared to osteoarthritis (P=.009, P=.002, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in both right and left Q angle between osteoporosis and osteopenia (P=.730, P=.491, respectively), and osteopenia and osteoarthritis (P=.022, P=.017, respectively). However, a statistically significant difference was found between osteoporosis and osteoarthritis in the right (P=.009) and left (P=.002) sides. In addition, a significant negative correlation was found between Q angle and FPI and NDT in all patients in this study (P < .01). Conclusion: Patients with osteoporosis were found to have a higher Q angle than osteoarthritis and osteopenia patients. In addition, foot posture and pes planus were found to be associated with the Q angle. Osteoporosis patients may have a tendency to valgum.
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.