ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
The added value of distal radius bone mineral density for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in patients with a history of fragility fracture.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreventing osteoporotic fragility fractures is a critical health priority, yet there is limited data on the utility of distal radius bone mineral density (BMD) for this purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the added value of distal radius BMD in osteoporosis diagnosis in patients with a history of fragility fractures.
methodsIn a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, 1205 who were enrolled in the Fracture Liaison Service of our institute were included in the analysis. The main outcome was the BMD classification of patients using a 3-region BMD (femoral neck, lumbar spine, and distal radius) compared to the conventional 2-region BMD (femoral neck and lumbar spine). The lowest T-score from any skeletal site was used to classify patients into normal, osteopenia, or osteoporosis categories..
resultsUsing a 2-region BMD, normal, osteopenia, and osteoporosis were identified in 11.1%, 42.7%, and 46.2% of patients, respectively. After adding distal radius BMD, normal, osteopenia and osteoporosis were detected in 5.6%, 32.9%, and 61.6% of patients, respectively. Two-region and 3-region BMD were discordant in 185 patients. A significant moderate correlation was found between the distal radius T-score and both the lumbar spine T-score (r = 0.470, P < 0.001) and the femoral neck T-score (r = 0.528, P < 0.001).
conclusionThe addition of distal radius densitometry to the conventional BMD regions can result in an earlier diagnosis of osteoporosis in patients with a high risk of fragility fracture. Consequently, it has the potential to be integrated into future osteoporosis classification systems.
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.