ArticleArchives of osteoporosis2026
Provision of medication prescription in a fracture liaison service did not diminish during COVID.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We examined the association of COVID time periods and equity-related variables with pharmacotherapy in a large jurisdiction fracture liaison service (FLS). We did not observe a significant association between COVID time periods and medication prescription after adjusting for all covariates. This highlights another potential success of the FLS model. PURPOSE: Our objective was to examine the impact of COVID on bone-active medication prescription in a fracture liaison service (FLS), after adjusting for fracture risk status and equity-related variables.
methodsWe conducted a logistic regression analysis with medication prescription (prescription by a bone health specialist or primary care provider) as the outcome. The model included covariates COVID time periods (T1: "pre-COVID" (n = 2796); T2: "during COVID" (n = 1575); T3: "COVID recovery" (n = 2208)), fracture risk status (high risk/not high risk) and equity-related variables (sex, age, marital status, living arrangement, education status, geographic location, and presence of comorbidities). Goodness of fit was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and the Hosmer and Lemeshow test.
resultsFracture risk status was the primary driver of treatment with high-risk patients 7.8 times more likely to receive a medication prescription compared to patients who were not high risk, after adjusting for all covariates (OR = 7.80 [95% CI 6.91, 8.79]). COVID time period was not statistically significant. Female patients, those married or in a common-law relationship, living alone, or residing in urban areas were more likely to be prescribed medication. The model had good prediction power and fit the data well (AUC: 0.77; Hosmer-Lemeshow test p-value: 0.83).
conclusionAmong patients reached by the FLS, COVID time period was not significantly associated with medication prescription, although program reach decreased at T2 and T3. Fracture risk status, sex, marital status, living arrangement, and geographic location were significantly associated with medication prescription.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42384300What 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.