↓ Skip to main content

The vertebral fracture cascade in osteoporosis: a review of aetiopathogenesis

Overview of attention for article published in Osteoporosis International, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
Title
The vertebral fracture cascade in osteoporosis: a review of aetiopathogenesis
Published in
Osteoporosis International, January 2007
DOI 10.1007/s00198-006-0304-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. M. Briggs, A. M. Greig, J. D. Wark

Abstract

Once an initial vertebral fracture is sustained, the risk of subsequent vertebral fracture increases significantly. This phenomenon has been termed the "vertebral fracture cascade". Mechanisms underlying this fracture cascade are inadequately understood, creating uncertainty in the clinical environment regarding prevention of further fractures. The cascade cannot be explained by low bone mass alone, suggesting that factors independent of this parameter contribute to its aetiopathogenesis. This review explores physiologic properties that may help to explain the vertebral fracture cascade. Differences in bone properties, including bone mineral density and bone quality, between individuals with and those without osteoporotic vertebral fractures are discussed. Evidence suggests that non-bone parameters differ between individuals with and those without osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Spinal properties, including vertebral macroarchitecture, intervertebral disc integrity, spinal curvature and spinal loading are compared in these groups of individuals. Cross-sectional studies also indicate that neurophysiologic properties, particularly trunk control and balance, are affected by the presence of a vertebral fracture. This review provides a synthesis of the literature to highlight the multi-factorial aetiopathogenesis of the vertebral fracture cascade. With a more comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying this clinical problem, more effective preventative strategies may be developed to offset the fracture cascade.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 104 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 14%
Student > Master 15 14%
Other 14 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Other 26 24%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 39%
Engineering 12 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 7%
Sports and Recreations 5 5%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 18 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 February 2022.
All research outputs
#14,411,951
of 23,081,466 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#2,195
of 3,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,172
of 158,455 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#17
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,081,466 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 158,455 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.