ReviewCurrent osteoporosis reports2026
Beyond Fracture Probability: Communicating the Full Consequences of Fracture and Contextualization.
Review in Current osteoporosis reports, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewFracture risk calculators such as FRAX, the Garvan Fracture Risk Calculator, and QFracture are now embedded in clinical guidelines, yet they communicate only a single numerical probability. This review examines whether current tools adequately meet patients' informational needs and identifies critical gaps in fracture risk communication. RECENT
findingsMost patients want fracture risk information, but only approximately half actually receive it. Research consistently shows that patients globally prefer visual over numerical formats, yet existing tools do not communicate the consequences of fracture, including mortality, subsequent fracture risk, and loss of independence, nor do they contextualise risk within available treatment options. Three critical gaps are identified: the consequence gap (what fracture means for survival and function), the controllability gap (how treatment modifies risk), and the format gap (how risk is presented and understood). Moving fracture risk communication beyond a single number requires integrating consequence, context, and format. The digital platform BONEcheck addresses these gaps by incorporating mortality risk, refracture risk, skeletal age, treatment contextualisation, and multi-format presentation including icon arrays. Future research, clinical practice, and guideline development should prioritise a more complete, actionable, and patient-centred approach to fracture risk communication.
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.