High Rates of Imminent Subsequent Fracture After Femoral Neck Fracture in the Elderly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fragility fractures of the hip are known to be followed frequently by subsequent fragility fractures, including second hip fractures. Data on subsequent fractures are available for aggregated index femoral neck and intertrochanteric femoral fractures, grouped generically as hip fractures, but not specifically for femoral neck fractures. There is increasing recognition that a subsequent fracture often occurs early after a hip fracture in the elderly, creating an emphasis on the concept of "imminent fracture risk." Since 2000, there have been many reports on the care gap in interventions after a fragility fracture, with concern regarding the slow uptake of appropriate systemic treatments designed to prevent a subsequent fracture in high-risk patients. METHODS: As planned a priori, we performed an analysis of subsequent fractures after an index femoral neck fracture in 2 prospective clinical trials involving 2,520 patients from 90 sites on 5 continents. We recorded the incidence and time of occurrence of all secondary fragility fractures as well as the reported use of bone-protective medication in all subjects. RESULTS: In the 24 months following the index femoral neck fracture, 226 (9.0%) of 2,520 patients sustained at least 1 subsequent fragility fracture, including 113 hip fractures (4.5%). The median interval from the index fracture to a subsequent fracture was approximately 9.0 months. Only 25.2% (634) of the 2,520 patients reported using bone-protective medications at any time during follow-up. Female patients, those with nondisplaced index fractures, and those treated with arthroplasty, were more likely to have received protective medication. CONCLUSIONS: Subsequent fractures, including second hip fractures, occurred frequently and early following an index femoral neck fracture in 2 large global cohorts. Interventions to prevent a subsequent fracture were instituted in only 1 of 4 patients, even though a focused directive was included in both study protocols. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".