ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2026
Manual chart review reveals bisphosphonate exposure misclassification in atypical femur fracture patients: auditing medical records in two international cohorts.
Article 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.
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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We examined if inaccuracies in reported BP treatment in two large cohorts could explain the wide discrepancy observed between different patient cohorts with atypical femur fractures. Assessing BP treatment through manual review of medical and pharmacy records increased the discrepancy, indicating that other factors likely contribute to the observed variation. PURPOSE: Variation in results across fracture studies can stem from differences in study design, case definitions, data sources and healthcare settings, but in atypical femur fracture (AFF) studies, the reported proportion of AFF patients without bisphosphonate (BP) exposure shows an exceptionally wide variation. We aimed to evaluate whether misclassification of BP exposure could explain this variability and hypothesized that manual review of medical records would narrow differences between cohorts.
methodsThis retrospective study examined two population-based AFF cohorts: one from Sweden and one from Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). The Swedish cohort included 172 patients, aged ≥ 55 years with AFFs diagnosed between 2008 and 2010, of whom 38 had no recorded BP use. The KPSC cohort included 306 patients, aged ≥ 50 years with AFFs diagnosed between 2007 and 2017, of whom 29 were classified as BP-naïve. Manual review of medical records and pharmacy data was performed to verify BP exposure status.
resultsIn the Swedish cohort, manual review did not identify any additional BP exposure, leaving 38 of 172 patients classified as BP-naïve (22.1%). In contrast, in the KPSC cohort, evidence of prior BP use was identified in 20 of 29 patients initially classified as BP-naïve, further reducing the proportion of BP-naïve AFF cases from 9.5 to 2.9%.
conclusionMisclassification of BP exposure occurs and can substantially affect reported rates of BP-naïve AFF, but it does not fully explain the wide variation observed across studies. Additional contextual or methodological factors likely contribute and should be addressed in future AFF research.
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.