Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 229

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evidence of effectiveness of a fracture liaison service to reduce the re-fracture rate

Open access
Nakayama, A., Major, G., Holliday, E., Attia, J., Bogduk, N.·2016·Osteoporosis International

Abstract

SUMMARY: We assessed the ability of a fracture liaison service (FLS) to directly reduce re-fracture risk. Having a FLS is associated with a ∼40% reduction in the 3-year risk of major bone and ∼30% of any bone re-fracture. The number needed to treat to prevent a re-fracture is 20. INTRODUCTION: FLS have been promoted as the most effective interventions for secondary fracture prevention, and while there is evidence of increased rate of investigation and treatment at institutions with a FLS, only a few studies have considered fracture outcomes directly. We therefore sought to evaluate the ability of our FLS to reduce re-fracture risk. METHODS: Historical cohort study of all patients ≥50 years presenting over a 6-month period with a minimal trauma fracture (MTF) to the emergency departments of a tertiary hospital with a FLS, and one without a FLS. Baseline characteristics, mortality and MTFs over a 3-year follow-up were recorded. RESULTS: Five hundred fifteen patients at the FLS hospital and 416 patients at the non-FLS hospital were studied. Over 3 years, 63/515 (12%) patients at the FLS hospital and 70/416 (17%) at the non-FLS hospital had a MTF. All patients were analysed in an intention-to-treat analysis regardless of whether they were seen in the FLS follow-up clinic. Statistical analysis using Cox proportional hazard models in the presence of a competing risk of death from any cause was used. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, there was a ∼30% reduction in rate of any re-fracture at the FLS hospital (hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, confidence interval (CI) 0.47-0.95, p value 0.025) and a ∼40% reduction in major re-fractures (hip, spine, femur, pelvis or humerus) (HR 0.59, CI 0.39-0.90, p value 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: We found a ∼30% reduction in any re-fractures and a ∼40% reduction in major re-fractures at the FLS hospital compared with a similar non-FLS hospital. The number of patients needed to treat to prevent one new fracture over 3 years is 20.

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 · 10.1007/s00198-015-3443-0

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Metadata

Authors
Nakayama, A., Major, G., Holliday, E., Attia, J., & Bogduk, N.
Venue
Osteoporosis International
Published
2015-12-09
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
873-879
ISSN
  • 0937-941X (ISSN-L)
  • 1433-2965
OpenAlex
W2190852697
Cited by
229
References
3
FWCI
13.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Evidence of effectiveness of a fracture liaison service to reduce the re-fracture rate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00198-015-3443-0
The paper
Nakayama, A., Major, G., Holliday, E., Attia, J., & Bogduk, N. (2016). Evidence of effectiveness of a fracture liaison service to reduce the re-fracture rate. Osteoporosis International. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-015-3443-0

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.