MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158592452 · doi:10.1345/aph.1g226

Natural Health Products in the Prevention and Treatment of Osteoporosis: Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

2006· review· en· W2158592452 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Pharmacotherapy · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicVitamin K Research Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineJadad scaleRandomized controlled trialMEDLINECochrane LibrarySystematic reviewOsteoporosisPhysical therapyClinical trialIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Consumers are increasingly looking to natural health products to manage specific diseases such as osteoporosis. As a result, healthcare providers need evidence-based information on which to base recommendations regarding use and efficacy. OBJECTIVE: To identify natural health products (NHPs, ie, dietary supplements) advocated for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis and systematically review the evidence from randomized controlled trials for the effect of NHPs on bone mineral density (BMD)/fracture rate in women. METHODS: MEDLINE, Natural Medicines Comprehensive Database, and the Internet were initially searched to identify NHPs advocated for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. For NHPs having evidence to support their claim, the aforementioned sources, along with International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, the Cochrane Library, the International Bibliographic Information on Dietary Supplements, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health, and HerbMed, were searched to locate randomized controlled trials published in English between 1966 and October 2004. Bibliographies of identified articles were also searched. Randomized controlled trials were selected if they evaluated the use of a single NHP in women, using BMD/fracture rate as the outcome measure. NHPs were excluded from further evaluation if a review had already been published. Data were extracted using predetermined criteria and studies appraised using the Jadad scale. Forty-five NHPs were identified that the authors claimed to be beneficial in prevention and treatment of osteoporosis, with 15 having evidence to support their claim. Calcium; copper; evening primrose oil; fish oils; fluoride; magnesium; manganese; strontium; vitamin D; and black, green, and oolong tea did not meet study criteria. RESULTS: Results from randomized controlled trials evaluating dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), phytoestrogens, and vitamin K2 (menaquinone or menatetrenone) were promising; however, study limitations suggest the need for confirmatory evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Although no definitive conclusions can be drawn, the relative safety of phytoestrogens, DHEA, and vitamin K2 at the studied doses, as well as preliminary positive results from randomized controlled trials, provides some initial support for the use of these NHPs in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in women.

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.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0270.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.324 · 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