CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 186Bone health and osteoporosis researchMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsHip and Femur Fractures

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The care gap in diagnosis and treatment of women with a fragility fracture

Bessette, L., Ste-Marie, L.-G., Jean, S., Davison, K. S., Beaulieu, M., Baranci, M., Bessant, J., Brown, J. P.·2008·Osteoporosis International
DOI 10.1007/s00198-007-0426-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Unlabelled In women aged 50 years or more who experienced a fracture, 81% suffered a fragility fracture. Six to eight months after fragility fracture, 79% had either not been investigated for osteoporosis or prescribed anti-fracture therapy. Despite fragility fractures being common in this population osteoporosis is under-diagnosed and under-treated. Introduction The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic and treatment rates for osteoporosis six months following fragility fracture. Methods This prospective cohort study was set in the general community from the Province of Quebec, Canada. Women at least 50 years of age who suffered a fracture were recruited during their initial visit to the hospital and had their fracture type classified as either fragility or traumatic. Six-to-eight months after fragility fracture, women were again contacted to evaluate the diagnostic and treatment rates of osteoporosis. Results Of the 2,075 women recruited over a 25 month period 1,688 (81%) sustained a fragility fracture and 387 (19%) sustained a traumatic fracture. Nine hundred and three participants with a fragility fracture were again contacted six-to-eight months after fracture. For the 739 women not on treatment on the recruitment day, only 15.4% initiated pharmacological therapy in the six-to-eight-month period following fracture and 79.0% had either not been investigated for osteoporosis or prescribed anti-fracture treatment. Conclusions The proportion of fragility fra…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00198-007-0426-9

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Klotzbuecher CM, Ross PD, Landsman PB et al (2000) Patients with prior fractures have an increased risk of future fractures: a summary of the literature and statistical synthesis. J Bone Miner Res 15:721–739 · DOI
  2. Hajcsar EE, Hawker G, Bogoch ER (2000) Investigation and treatment of osteoporosis in patients with fragility fracture. Can Med Assoc J 163:819–822
  3. Ingle BM, Eastell R (2002) Site-specific bone measurements in patients with ankle fracture. Osteoporos Int 13:342–347 · DOI
  4. Jacobsen D, Sargent J, Atkinson EJ et al (1999) Contribution of weather to the seasonality of distal forearm fractures: a population-based study in Rochester, Minnesota. Osteoporos Int 9:254–259 · DOI
  5. Tromp AM, Smit JH, Deeg DJH et al (1998) Predictors for falls and fractures in longitudinal aging study Amsterdam. J Bone Miner Res 13:1932–1939 · DOI
  6. Kannus P, Palvanen M, Niemi S et al (2000) Epidemiology of osteoporotic pelvic fractures in elderly people in Finland: sharp increase in 1970–1997 and alarming projections for the new Millennium. Osteoporos Int 11:443–448 · DOI
  7. Kanis JA, Oden A, Johnell O et al (2001) The burden of osteoporotic fractures: a method for setting intervention thresholds. Osteoporos Int 12:417–427 · DOI
  8. Khan SA, de Geus C, Holroyd B et al (2001) Osteoporosis follow-up after wrist fractures following minor trauma. Arch Intern Med 161:1309–1312 · DOI
  9. Kreiger N, Tenenhouse A, Joseph L et al (1999) The Canadian multicentre osteoporosis study (CaMos): background, rationale, methods. Canadian Journal of Aging 18:376–387 · DOI
  10. Iskrant AP, Smith RW (1969) Osteoporosis in women 45 years and over related to subsequent fracture. Public Health Rep 84:33–38 · DOI
  11. Sanders KM, Pasco JA, Ugoni AM et al (1998) The exclusion of high trauma fractures may underestimate the prevalence of bone fragility fractures in the community: the Geelong osteoporosis study. J Bone Miner Res 13:1337–1342 · DOI
  12. Karlsson MK, Hasserius R, Obrant KJ (1993) Individuals who sustain nonosteoporotic fractures continue to also sustain fragility fractures. Calcif Tissue Int 53:229–231 · DOI
  13. Black DM, Thompson DE, Bauer DC et al (2000) Fracture risk reduction with alendronate in women with osteoporosis: the fracture intervention trial. FIT Research Group. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 85:4118–4124 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Maricic M, Adachi J, Meunier P et al (2000) Raloxifene 60 mg/day has effects within 12 months in postmenopausal osteoporosis treatment and prevention studies. Arthritis Rheum 9(suppl):S197
  15. Harrington JT, Ste-Marie LG, Brandi ML et al (2004) Risedronate rapidly reduces the risk for nonvertebral fractures in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 74:129–135 · DOI
  16. Pols HA, Felsenberg D, Hanley DA et al (1999) Multinational, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of the effects of alendronate on bone density and fracture risk in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: results of the FOSIT study. Fosamax International Trial Study Group. Osteoporos Int 9:461–468 · DOI
  17. Roux C, Seeman E, Eastell R et al (2004) Efficacy of risedronate on clinical vertebral fractures within six months. Curr Med Res Opin 20:433–439 · DOI
  18. Brown JP Jr (2002) 2002 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada. Can Med Assoc J 167:S1–S36
  19. McClung MR, Geusens P, Miller PD et al (2001) Effect of risedronate on the risk of hip fracture in elderly women. N Engl J Med 344:333–340 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Lips P (1997) Epidemiology and predictors of fractures associated with osteoporosis. Am J Med 103:S3–S8 · DOI
  21. Tenenhouse A, Joseph L, Krieger N et al (2000) Estimation of the prevalence of low bone density in Canadian women and men using a population-specific DXA reference standard: the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos). Osteoporos Int 11:897–904 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bessette, L., Ste-Marie, L.-G., Jean, S., Davison, K. S., Beaulieu, M., Baranci, M., Bessant, J., & Brown, J. P.
Affiliations
  • Centre hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CA)
  • Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec (CA)
  • Merck Canada Inc. (Canada) (CA)
  • Sanofi (Canada) (CA)
  • Procter & Gamble (Canada) (CA)
Corresponding author
Bessette, L.
ORCID
Venue
Osteoporosis International
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2007-07-20
Volume
19
Issue
1
Pages
79-86
ISSN
  • 0937-941X (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-2965
DOI
10.1007/s00198-007-0426-9
OpenAlex
W2025438791
Cited by
186
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 14
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Osteoporosis International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Procter and Gamble
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Menopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hip and Femur Fractures
Keywords
fragility fractures, osteoporosis, underdiagnosis of osteoporosis, postmenopausal women, care gaps, fracture risk assessment
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Continuity of Patient Care, Female, Fractures, Spontaneous, Humans, Middle Aged, Osteoporosis, Prospective Studies, Quebec, Episode of Care, Fractures, Bone

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