| Title |
Models of care for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Osteoporosis International, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00198-012-2090-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Ganda, M. Puech, J. S. Chen, R. Speerin, J. Bleasel, J. R. Center, J. A. Eisman, L. March, M. J. Seibel |
| Abstract |
Most people presenting with incident osteoporotic fractures are neither assessed nor treated for osteoporosis to reduce their risk of further fractures, despite the availability of effective treatments. We evaluated the effectiveness of published models of care for the secondary prevention of osteoporotic fractures. We searched eight medical literature databases to identify reports published between 1996 and 2011, describing models of care for secondary fracture prevention. Information extracted from each publication included study design, patient characteristics, identification strategies, assessment and treatment initiation strategies, as well as outcome measures (rates of bone mineral density (BMD) testing, osteoporosis treatment initiation, adherence, re-fractures and cost-effectiveness). Meta-analyses of studies with valid control groups were conducted for two outcome measures: BMD testing and osteoporosis treatment initiation. Out of 574 references, 42 articles were identified as analysable. These studies were grouped into four general models of care-type A: identification, assessment and treatment of patients as part of the service; type B: similar to A, without treatment initiation; type C: alerting patients plus primary care physicians; and type D: patient education only. Meta-regressions revealed a trend towards increased BMD testing (p = 0.06) and treatment initiation (p = 0.03) with increasing intensity of intervention. One type A service with a valid control group showed a significant decrease in re-fractures. Types A and B services were cost-effective, although definition of cost-effectiveness varied between studies. Fully coordinated, intensive models of care for secondary fracture prevention are more effective in improving patient outcomes than approaches involving alerts and/or education only. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 187 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 187 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 10% |
| Other | 17 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 17 | 9% |
| Other | 44 | 24% |
| Unknown | 43 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 85 | 45% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 11% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2023.
All research outputs
#4,631,976
of 23,463,424 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#746
of 3,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,340
of 165,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#8
of 41 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,463,424 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 165,897 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 41 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.