Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 663

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Risk of Subsequent Fracture After Low-Trauma Fracture in Men and Women

Center, Jacqueline R., Bliuc, Dana, Nguyen, Tuan V., Eisman, John A.·2007·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: There are few published long-term data on absolute risk of subsequent fracture (refracture) following initial low-trauma fracture in women and fewer in men. OBJECTIVE: To examine long-term risk of subsequent fracture following initial osteoporotic fracture in men and women. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort study (Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study) in Australia of 2245 community-dwelling women and 1760 men aged 60 years or older followed up for 16 years from July 1989 through April 2005. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence of first (initial) fracture and incidence of subsequent fracture according to sex, age group, and time since first fracture. Relative risk was determined by comparing risk of subsequent fracture with risk of initial fracture. RESULTS: There were 905 women and 337 men with an initial fracture, of whom 253 women and 71 men experienced a subsequent fracture. Relative risk (RR) of subsequent fracture in women was 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.70-2.25) and in men was 3.47 (95% CI, 2.68-4.48). As a result, absolute risk of subsequent fracture was similar in women and men and at least as great as the initial fracture risk for a woman 10 years older. Thus, women and men aged 60 to 69 years had absolute refracture rates of 36/1000 person-years (95% CI, 26-48/1000) and 37/1000 person-years (95% CI, 23-59/1000), respectively. The increase in absolute fracture risk remained for up to 10 years, by which time 40% to 60% of surviving women and men experienced a subsequent fracture. All fracture locations apart from rib (men) and ankle (women) resulted in increased subsequent fracture risk, with highest RRs following hip (RR, 9.97; 95% CI, 1.38-71.98) and clinical vertebral (RR, 15.12; 95% CI, 6.06-37.69) fractures in younger men. In multivariate analyses, femoral neck bone mineral density, age, and smoking were predictors of subsequent fracture in women and femoral neck bone mineral density, physical activity, and calcium intake were predictors in men. CONCLUSION: After an initial low-trauma fracture, absolute risk of subsequent fracture was similar for men and women. This increased risk occurred for virtually all clinical fractures and persisted for up to 10 years.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.297.4.387

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 663

Metadata

Authors
Center, J. R., Bliuc, D., Nguyen, T. V., & Eisman, J. A.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2007-01-24
Volume
297
Issue
4
Pages
387
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2110467562
Cited by
663
References
1
FWCI
30.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Risk of Subsequent Fracture After Low-Trauma Fracture in Men and Women. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.297.4.387
The paper
Center, J. R., Bliuc, D., Nguyen, T. V., & Eisman, J. A. (2007). Risk of Subsequent Fracture After Low-Trauma Fracture in Men and Women. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.297.4.387

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.