DEFINING IMMINENT RISK USING FRAX SCORE MULTIPLIERS FOR PATIENTS WITH RECENT NON-HIP FRAGILITY FRACTURES
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The widely used Fracture Risk Assessment Tool (FRAX) estimates a 10-year probability of major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) using age, sex, body mass index, and seven clinical risk factors, including prior fracture history. Prior fracture is binary in FRAX, although it is now clear that prior fractures affect future MOF risk differently depending on fracture recency and site. Risk of MOF is highest in the first two years following a fracture &ndash; this is defined as imminent risk. Therefore, the FRAX tool may underestimate true fracture risk, resulting in missed opportunities for earlier osteoporosis management. To address this, multipliers based on age, sex, and fracture type may be applied to baseline FRAX scores for patients with recent fractures. Adjusted FRAX estimates may enable earlier pharmacologic treatment and other risk reduction strategies. This study aimed to report the effect of multipliers on conventional FRAX scores in patients with recent non-hip and non-vertebral fragility fractures.&nbsp; After obtaining Research Ethics Board approval, both standard and multiplier-adjusted FRAX scores were calculated for patients included in our outpatient Fracture Liaison Service who were 50 years or older and had experienced a distal radius or proximal humerus fracture between June 2020 and May 2022. Exclusion criteria consisted of patients under 50 years old, or hip or vertebral fractures. Age- and sex-based FRAX multipliers for recent distal radius and proximal humerus fractures described by McCloskey et al. (2021) were applied to conventional FRAX scores. Low, intermediate, and high-risk of MOF was defined as less than 10%, 10–20%, and greater than 20%, respectively. Data are reported as mean for continuous variables and as proportions for categorical variables. Paired samples t-tests were used to compare FRAX scores pre- and post-modifier adjustment. A total of 142 patients with an average age of 65 years (range = 50–97) were included. The majority of patients were female 90.1%, with 75.4% sustaining distal radius fractures and 24.6% sustaining proximal humerus fractures. In the distal radius group, the average MOF risk significantly increased from pre-multiplier (17.2) to post-multiplier adjustment (21.0; p<0.05). Seventeen percent of patients in the distal radius group moved from intermediate to high 10-year fracture risk after multiplier adjustment. Average FRAX scores significantly increased in the humerus group from before (16.1) to after multiplier adjustment (23.0; p <0.01), with 28.6% of patients moving from an intermediate risk to a high-risk score. Multiplier adjustment produces a clinically significant increase in conventional FRAX scores in some patients with recent non-hip fragility fractures. Twenty-eight percent of patients with humerus fractures and 17% of patients with distal radius fractures moved from intermediate to high- risk of MOF after multiplier adjustment, now meeting criteria for pharmacologic management. Using the modified FRAX score as a clinical decision-making tool in patients with recent fragility fractures may guide earlier initiation of anti-resorptive therapies and reduce the risk of future osteoporotic fractures.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».