Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42484876›Full record

ReviewOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2026

Osteoporosis and post-fracture management in the primary care setting: a systematic review.

Mystica Jude, Mícheál Ó Breasail, Stefanie Bird, Jakub Mesinovic, Paul Jansons, Jackson J Fyfe, David Scott, Robin M Daly, Jason Talevski

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Mystica JudeDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0004-4073-6642
Mícheál Ó BreasailDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9695-6378
Stefanie BirdDepartment of Medicine-Western Health, The University of Melbourne, St Albans, VIC, Australia.
Jakub MesinovicDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1297-2731
Paul JansonsDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8766-0516
Jackson J FyfeInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9541-2336
David ScottDepartment of Medicine, School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5226-1972
Robin M DalyInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9897-1598
Jason TalevskiInstitute for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia. j.talevski@deakin.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9180-8758

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To synthesize evidence on osteoporosis and fragility fracture management within the primary care setting. A systematic review was conducted using Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, and PsycINFO to identify studies published between 2005 and 2025. Eligible studies included qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods designs that examined any stage of osteoporosis and fragility fracture care (risk assessment, diagnosis, treatment, prevention) in adults ≥ 50 years within primary care. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and appraised methodological quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Outcomes were categorised into four domains: (1) health provider and patient knowledge, perceptions, and experiences; (2) osteoporosis diagnosis and treatment patterns; (3) interventions to improve care; and (4) barriers and facilitators to optimal care. Eighty studies were included, comprising cross-sectional surveys, cohort studies, randomized controlled trials, and qualitative studies. Clinician knowledge was moderate, with gaps in guideline familiarity, fracture risk assessment, and pharmacotherapy. Osteoporosis and fragility fractures were widely under-identified and undertreated, with minimal screening, minimal diagnostic testing, and substantial undertreatment of guideline-eligible patients. Interventions such as electronic decision-support and fracture liaison services consistently increased BMD testing and appropriate prescribing. System-level barriers to osteoporosis and post-fracture care included limited consultation time, unclear responsibility allocation, and fragmented communication between care settings, while patient-level barriers involved limited understanding of osteoporosis and concerns about medications.Osteoporosis management in primary care remains inadequate. System-integrated, coordinator-driven approaches combined with targeted patient education effectively increase diagnosis and treatment rates, highlighting known strategies to reduce subsequent fractures and improve patient outcomes.

Indexed as

Family practiceFracturesGeneral practitionerOsteoporosisPrimary care

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.