MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553677537 · doi:10.1002/jbmr.3039

Goal-Directed Treatment for Osteoporosis: A Progress Report From the ASBMR-NOF Working Group on Goal-Directed Treatment for Osteoporosis

2016· article· en· W2553677537 on OpenAlexaff
Steven R. Cummings, Felicia Cosman, E. Michael Lewiecki, John T. Schousboe, Douglas C. Bauer, Dennis M. Black, Thomas D. Brown, Angela M. Cheung, Kathleen Cody, Cyrus Cooper, Adolfo Díez‐Pérez, Richard Eastell, Peyman Hadji, Takayuki Hosoi, Suzanne M. Jan de Beur, Risa Kagan, Douglas P. Kiel, Ian R. Reid, Daniel H. Solomon, Susan Randall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMuscular Dystrophy CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsOsteoporosisMedicineBone mineralPhysical therapyIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The American Society for Bone and Mineral Research and the United States National Osteoporosis Foundation (NOF) formed a working group to develop principles of goal-directed treatment and identify gaps that need to be filled to implement this approach. With goal-directed treatment, a treatment goal would first be established and choice of treatment determined by the probability of achieving that goal. Goals of treatment would be freedom from fracture, a T-score > –2.5, which is above the NOF threshold for initiating treatment, or achievement of an estimated risk level below the threshold for initiating treatment. Progress toward reaching the patient's goal would be periodically and systematically assessed by estimating the patient's compliance with treatment, reviewing fracture history, repeating vertebral imaging when indicated, and repeating measurement of bone mineral density (BMD). Using these data, a decision would be made to stop, continue, or change therapy. Some of these approaches can now be applied to clinical practice. However, the application of goal-directed treatment cannot be fully achieved until medications are available that provide greater increases in BMD and greater reduction in fracture risk than those that are currently approved; only then can patients with very high fracture risk and very low BMD achieve such goals. Furthermore, assessing future fracture risk in patients on treatment requires a new assessment tool that accurately captures the change in fracture risk associated with treatment and should also be sensitive to the importance of recent fractures as predictors of imminent fracture risk. Lastly, evidence is needed to confirm that selecting and switching treatments to achieve goals reduces fracture risk more effectively than current standard care. © 2016 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. Abstract The fundamental principle of treat-to-goal for osteoporosis is that treatment should be selected according to having a high likelihood of achieving an acceptable level of fracture risk. This is different than but complementary to the current paradigm of monitoring for response to therapy, usually with bone density testing by DXA or bone turnover markers. A patient may respond to therapy yet continue to have an unacceptably high fracture risk. Response to treatment is essential but not necessarily sufficient in achieving an acceptable level of fracture risk.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations162
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Mineral ResearchSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207