ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2026
Secondary fracture prevention after vertebral, femur or pelvic fracture at US academic medical center.
Article in Archives of osteoporosis, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study sought to assess rates of osteoporosis treatment following an index fragility vertebra, femur, or pelvic fracture at a US academic medical center. The results highlight persistent low treatment rates following fracture and emphasize the need for interventions such as formal fracture liaison programs to improve patient outcomes. PURPOSE: Fragility fractures occur with low-energy trauma in patients with weakened bone strength and are associated with reductions in quality of life, function, and independence. The risk of re-fracture after a fragility fracture is significantly elevated. Prevention of secondary fractures is imperative as the population ages, given the morbidity, mortality, and costs directly attributable to these fractures. Unfortunately, treatment rates remain low despite the availability of effective therapies to reduce the risk of secondary fracture.
methodsWe assessed the rate of pharmacologic treatment after vertebral, femur, or pelvic fracture within our academic medical center. In addition, we investigated potential factors, such as race or endocrinology consultation, which might influence post-fracture treatment.
resultsOur sample included 814 females over age 65, who sustained a hip, pelvis, or vertebral fracture between January 2018 and December 2021. Within the sample, 29.7% received an anti-fracture prescription within 6 months of fracture. Those with osteoporosis included on their electronic health record (EHR) problem list had a significantly higher percent probability (28.6, 95% confidence interval (CI), 22.9, 34.3) of anti-fracture therapy prescription compared to those without osteoporosis on their problem list. Furthermore, Black patients were less likely to have a diagnosis of osteoporosis listed (p < 0.0001) and had a 10.9 percentage point lower probability of receiving a prescription compared to White patients (CI, 1.9, 19.9).
conclusionThese results suggest that the majority of patients in our health care system did not receive effective pharmacotherapy for secondary fracture prevention. The study highlights the need for more effective interventions to reduce secondary fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41784727What 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.