Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 605

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

International Variations in Hip Fracture Probabilities: Implications for Risk Assessment

Kanis, John A., Johnell, Olof, De Laet, Chris, Jonsson, Bengt, Oden, Anders, Ogelsby, Alan K.·2002·Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

Abstract

It is recommended that intervention thresholds should be based on absolute fracture risk, but there is a large variation in hip fracture incidence from different regions of the world. The aim of this study was to examine heterogeneity of hip fracture probability in different regions from recent estimates of hip fracture incidence and mortality to adjust intervention thresholds. Ten-year probabilities of hip fracture were computed in men and women at 10-year intervals from the age of 50 years and lifetime risks at the age of 50 years from the hazard functions of hip fracture and death. Lifetime risk at the age of 50 years varied from 1% in women from Turkey to 28.5% in women from Sweden. High lifetime risks in women were associated with high lifetime risks in men (r = 0.83). There also were significant correlations of 10-year risk at any age between men and women. Ten-year probability was standardized to that of men and women from Sweden (set at 1.0). There was a 15-fold range in 10-year probability from 1.24 in Norway to 0.08 in Chile. Countries were categorized by 10-year probabilities comprising very high risk (Norway, Iceland, Sweden, Denmark, and the United States), high risk (China [Taiwan {TW}], Germany, Switzerland, Finland, Greece, Canada, The Netherlands, Hungary, Singapore, Italy, United Kingdom, Kuwait, Australia, and Portugal), medium risk (China [Hong Kong {HK}], France, Japan, Spain, Argentina, and China), and low risk (Turkey, Korea, Venezuela, and Chile). The categorization of hip fracture probabilities can be used to adjust intervention thresholds based on age, sex, and relative risk from a reference population such as Sweden.

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 · 10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.7.1237

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 605

Metadata

Authors
Kanis, J. A., Johnell, O., De Laet, C., Jonsson, B., Oden, A., & Ogelsby, A. K.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
Published
2002-07-01
Volume
17
Issue
7
Pages
1237-1244
ISSN
  • 0884-0431 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-4681
OpenAlex
W2169929115
Cited by
605
References
1
FWCI
14.28
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: International Variations in Hip Fracture Probabilities: Implications for Risk Assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.7.1237
The paper
Kanis, J. A., Johnell, O., De Laet, C., Jonsson, B., Oden, A., & Ogelsby, A. K. (2002). International Variations in Hip Fracture Probabilities: Implications for Risk Assessment. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. https://doi.org/10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.7.1237

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.