Atypical Femur Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Osteoporosis (OP) results from an imbalance between bone production and absorption that results in decreased bone mass and microstructural deterioration of the bone trabeculae, leading to diminished bone quality and fragility fractures. It is synonymous with decreased bone strength and affects millions of people worldwide. The most commonly prescribed drugs for the treatment of OP are the bisphosphonates (BPs). Long-term BP use may be associated with stress fractures of the subtrochanteric and shaft regions of the femur known as atypical femur fractures (AFFs). Although AFFs can be devastating, BPs have decreased the number of low-energy hip fractures and the number of vertebral and nonvertebral fractures that occur each year. Many trials and population-based studies have assessed the association between AFF and BP, and several studies have attempted to establish AFF's true incidence. The authors will summarize a few of the major studies and discuss their strengths and limitations. The findings of an association between BPs and AFFs have been variable and may reflect sample selection and measurement bias. AFFs are uncommon; the increase in risk associated with BP use is very small and does not outweigh the benefit of fracture prevention in patients with OP. Evidence for the efficacy of BPs for the prevention of fractures in postmenopausal women with OP is very strong, and the current clinical practice of using BPs as first-line therapy for these patients should be continued. Further information is required to determine the appropriate duration and time of discontinuation of BP therapy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".