MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004832472 · doi:10.1097/bot.0b013e31815e9ff7

The Osteoporosis Needs of Patients With Wrist Fracture

2008· article· en· W2004832472 on OpenAlexaff
Earl R. Bogoch, Victoria Elliot‐Gibson, Benjamin G. Escott, Dorcas Beaton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteoporosisOsteopeniaWristPhysical therapyPediatricsSurgeryInternal medicineBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To provide information for practitioners regarding the osteoporosis (OP)-related needs of patients who present with low-trauma wrist fractures and are at high risk of subsequent hip fracture. DESIGN: Prospective protocol, retrospective analysis. SETTING: Large urban teaching hospital, regional trauma center. PATIENTS: All outpatients (women > or =40 years; men > or =50 years) who sustained fragility fractures of the wrist between December 1, 2002 and June 30, 2005. INTERVENTION: Patients were evaluated by a coordinator and recruited to an OP program for education, diagnosis, and treatment. Patient demographic data were collected. A baseline questionnaire included fracture and OP risk history, sociodemographics, Osteoporosis Health Beliefs Scale, and Osteoporosis Self-Efficacy Scale. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Fracture history, OP risk factors, attitudes, and beliefs. RESULTS: Of 339 patients with wrist fractures, 286 had fragility fractures (mean age 64.8 years; 82% female) and met the age criteria. Seventeen percent of men and 36% of women with fragility wrist fractures had been previously diagnosed with OP or osteopenia; nearly all of them had been prescribed supplements, and two thirds had received aminobisphosphonate treatment for OP. Half of the patients had one or more risk factors for OP. Most patients were aware of OP, but few felt their fracture could result from OP. Bone densitometry completed on 55 patients in the first year indicated OP or osteopenia in 43 of 55 patients. Patients' health beliefs underestimated the seriousness of OP. Every patient with a fragility fracture of the wrist should understand that: (1) their fracture may be related to OP; (2) by having a fragility fracture, they are at higher risk for hip fracture; and (3) preventive treatment is effective and safe. Information should be partly gender specific. Patients who believe that weak bones didn't cause their fracture require additional attention to motivate them to undergo special treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention by the orthopaedic team to address potential underlying OP in patients with low-trauma wrist fractures should include directed patient education, testing, treatment with supplements and pharmacotherapy where indicated, and referral as needed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Orthopaedic TraumaSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207