Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 695

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality, Disability, and Nursing Home Use for Persons with and without Hip Fracture: A Population‐Based Study

Leibson, Cynthia L., Tosteson, Anna N. A., Gabriel, Sherine E., Ransom, Jeanine E., Melton, L. Joseph·2002·Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare persons with and without hip fracture for subsequent mortality and change in disability and nursing home (NH) use. DESIGN: Population‐based historical cohort study. SETTING: Olmsted County, Minnesota. PARTICIPANTS: All residents who experienced a first hip fracture between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1993, and, for each case, a resident of the same sex and similar age who had not experienced a hip fracture and was seen by a local care provider. MEASUREMENTS: Data on disability (Rankin score), comorbidity (Charlson Index), and NH residency before baseline (fracture date for cases and registration date for controls) were obtained by review of complete community‐based medical records. The records were then reviewed from baseline through December 31, 1994, for Rankin disability at 1 month and 1 year, all NH admissions and discharges, and date of death for those who died. RESULTS: There were 312 cases and 312 controls (81% female, mean age ± standard deviation = 81 ± 12 years). Before baseline, cases had higher comorbidity (45% vs 30% had Charlson Index ≥ 1, P < .001) and disability (mean Rankin score = 2.5 ± 1.1 vs 2.2 ± 1.1, P < .001) and were more likely to be in a NH (28% vs 18%, P < .001) than controls. One year after baseline, estimated mortality was 20% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 16–24) for cases vs 11% (95% CI = 8–15) for controls, 51% of cases versus 16% of controls had a level of disability one or more units worse than before baseline ( P < .001), and the cumulative incidence of first NH admission was 64% (95% CI = 58–71) for cases versus 7% (95% CI = 4–11) for controls. The risk of NH admission for cases relative to controls diminished over time, but remained elevated 5 years after the event (risk ratio = 20.0 at 3 months and 2.1 at 5 years), but, in persons admitted to a nursing home, cases were two times more likely than controls to be discharged alive within a year ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Hip fracture is an important contributor to disability and NH use, but the potential savings from hip fracture prophylaxis may be overestimated by studies that fail to consider differential risk, mortality, and long‐term follow‐up.

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 · 10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50455.x

Cites

26 of 26 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 26 references

Cited by

See all 695

Metadata

Authors
Leibson, C. L., Tosteson, A. N. A., Gabriel, S. E., Ransom, J. E., & Melton, L. J.
Venue
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-10
Volume
50
Issue
10
Pages
1644-1650
ISSN
  • 0002-8614 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-5415
OpenAlex
W2009508470
Cited by
695
References
26
FWCI
7.26
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: Mortality, Disability, and Nursing Home Use for Persons with and without Hip Fracture: A Population‐Based Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50455.x
The paper
Leibson, C. L., Tosteson, A. N. A., Gabriel, S. E., Ransom, J. E., & Melton, L. J. (2002). Mortality, Disability, and Nursing Home Use for Persons with and without Hip Fracture: A Population‐Based Study. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1532-5415.2002.50455.x

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.