MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210533366 · doi:10.1007/s11657-022-01073-1

An update of the prevalence of osteoporosis, fracture risk factors, and medication use among community-dwelling older adults: results from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA)

2022· article· en· W4210533366 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Caitlin McArthur, Ahreum Lee, Hajar Abu Alrob, Jonathan D. Adachi, Lora Giangregorio, Lauren E. Griffith, Suzanne N. Morin, Lehana Thabane, George Ioannidis, Justin Lee, William D. Leslie, Αλεξάνδρα Παπαϊωάννου

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Osteoporosis · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityResearch Institute for AgingUniversity of WaterlooMcMaster UniversityUniversity of ManitobaCentre for Excellence in Mining InnovationDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsOsteoporosisMedicineFRAXHip fracturePhysical therapyCohortInternal medicineGerontologyOsteoporotic fractureDemographyBone mineral

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The prevalence of self-reported and DXA-confirmed osteoporosis was 7.8% (males 2.2%; females 12.7%), and 3.6% (males 1.2%; females 5.9%), respectively. We found that most community-dwelling older adults at high fracture risk are not taking osteoporosis medication, particularly males. There is a major opportunity for improved primary fracture prevention in the community. PURPOSE: To provide an up-to-date prevalence estimate of osteoporosis, fracture risk factors, fracture risk, and the proportion of older Canadians at high fracture risk who are not taking an osteoporosis medication. METHODS: We included Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) participants: a community-dwelling cohort aged 45 to 85 years who completed the baseline (2015) comprehensive interview and had dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scans (N = 30,097). We describe the age- and sex-stratified prevalence of (1) self-reported osteoporosis; (2) DXA-confirmed osteoporosis; (3) fracture risk factors and people who are at high risk (FRAX® major osteoporotic fracture probability ≥ 20%); and (4) people who are at high fracture risk not taking osteoporosis medications. Sampling weights, as defined by the CLSA, were applied. RESULTS: The mean age of participants was 70.0 (SD 10.3). Overall, 7.8% had self-reported osteoporosis (males 2.2%; females 12.7%) while 3.6% had DXA-confirmed osteoporosis (males 1.2%; females 5.9%), and 2.8% were at high fracture risk (males 0.3%; females 5.1%). Of people who had osteoporosis and were at high risk, 77.3% were not taking an osteoporosis medication (males 92.3%; females 76.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides an up-to-date prevalence estimate of osteoporosis for community-dwelling older Canadians. We found that most community-dwelling older adults at high fracture risk are not taking an osteoporosis medication, particularly males. There is a major opportunity for improved primary fracture prevention in the community.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.351
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of OsteoporosisSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207