MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904409672 · doi:10.24095/hpcdp.38.12.02

Screening, prevention and management of osteoporosis among Canadian adults

2018· article· en· W2904409672 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Siobhan O’Donnell

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in Canada · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsPublic Health Agency of Canada
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchPublic Health AgencyPublic Health Agency of Canada
KeywordsOsteoporosisMedicineVitamin D and neurologyLogistic regressionFRAXPopulationPhysical therapyDemographyHip fractureBone densityGerontologyPediatricsFamily medicineBone mineralEnvironmental healthInternal medicineOsteoporotic fracture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This study provides a benchmark for the nationwide use of osteoporosis screening, prevention and management strategies among Canadians aged 40 years and older (40+) using data collected one year prior to the release of Osteoporosis Canada's latest (2010) clinical practice guidelines. METHODS: Data are from the 2009 Canadian Community Health Survey-Osteoporosis Rapid Response Component. The study sample (n = 5704) was divided into four risk subgroups: (1) osteoporosis diagnosis and major fracture; (2) osteoporosis diagnosis only; (3) major fracture only; or (4) neither osteoporosis diagnosis nor major fracture. We calculated descriptive statistics and performed multinomial multivariate logistic regression analyses to examine factors independently associated with osteoporosis screening, prevention and management strategies. Estimates were weighted to represent the Canadian household population (40+) living in the 10 provinces. RESULTS: Approximately 10.1% of the population or 1.5 million Canadians 40+ reported having been diagnosed with osteoporosis. The majority related taking vitamin D or calcium supplements and having been prescribed osteoporosis medication(s), while less than 40% reported regular physical activity. Among those without a reported osteoporosis diagnosis, an estimated 6.7% or 1 million reported having had a major fracture, of which one-third reported having had a bone density test and less than half reported taking vitamin D supplements, calcium supplements or engaging in regular physical activity. Major fracture history was not associated with bone density testing or osteoporosis medication use. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of Canadians at risk for osteoporosis-those with a major fracture history-are not undergoing bone density testing nor are they engaging in lifestyle approaches known to help maintain healthy bones. This study provides the historical information required to evaluate whether the latest clinical practice guidelines have had an impact on osteoporosis care in Canada.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Promotion and Chronic Disease Prevention in CanadaSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207