Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Przeglądasz jako GOŚĆ
Tytuł pozycji:

Fracture prediction and calibration of a Canadian FRAX® tool: a population-based report from CaMos.

Tytuł :
Fracture prediction and calibration of a Canadian FRAX® tool: a population-based report from CaMos.
Autorzy :
Fraser LA; Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics and Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Langsetmo L
Berger C
Ioannidis G
Goltzman D
Adachi JD
Papaioannou A
Josse R
Kovacs CS
Olszynski WP
Towheed T
Hanley DA
Kaiser SM
Prior J
Jamal S
Kreiger N
Brown JP
Johansson H
Oden A
McCloskey E
Kanis JA
Leslie WD
Pokaż więcej
Corporate Authors :
CaMos Research Group
Źródło :
Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA [Osteoporos Int] 2011 Mar; Vol. 22 (3), pp. 829-37. Date of Electronic Publication: 2010 Dec 16.
Typ publikacji :
Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Język :
English
Imprint Name(s) :
Original Publication: London, UK : Springer International, c1990-
MeSH Terms :
Hip Fractures/*epidemiology
Osteoporotic Fractures/*epidemiology
Risk Assessment/*methods
Aged ; Bone Density ; Calibration ; Canada/epidemiology ; Female ; Femur Neck/diagnostic imaging ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multicenter Studies as Topic ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prospective Studies ; Radiography ; Reproducibility of Results ; Risk Factors ; World Health Organization
References :
Osteoporos Int. 2004 Oct;15(10):834-41. (PMID: 15045468)
CMAJ. 1996 Oct 1;155(7):921-3. (PMID: 8837540)
CMAJ. 2009 Sep 1;181(5):265-71. (PMID: 19654194)
CMAJ. 2007 Sep 11;177(6):575-80. (PMID: 17846439)
Bone. 2009 May;44(5):734-43. (PMID: 19195497)
Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Jul;22(7):1425-36. (PMID: 16834841)
J Bone Miner Res. 2009 Sep;24(9):1515-22. (PMID: 19338456)
J Bone Miner Res. 2003 Nov;18(11):1947-54. (PMID: 14606506)
J Bone Miner Res. 1995 Jun;10(6):997-8. (PMID: 7572326)
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):385-97. (PMID: 18292978)
Osteoporos Int. 2006 Dec;17(12):1726-33. (PMID: 16983459)
J Bone Miner Res. 2002 Jul;17(7):1237-44. (PMID: 12096837)
Osteoporos Int. 2001;12(6):438-44. (PMID: 11446558)
Bone. 2004 Jan;34(1):195-202. (PMID: 14751578)
Osteoporos Int. 2005 Feb;16(2):155-62. (PMID: 15175845)
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):449-58. (PMID: 18292975)
Bone. 2004 Nov;35(5):1029-37. (PMID: 15542027)
Osteoporos Int. 2001;12(11):903-8. (PMID: 11804016)
Osteoporos Int. 2005 Jul;16(7):737-42. (PMID: 15455194)
Osteoporos Int. 2006 Oct;17(10):1459-71. (PMID: 16847588)
BMJ. 1996 May 18;312(7041):1254-9. (PMID: 8634613)
Arch Intern Med. 2004 May 24;164(10):1108-12. (PMID: 15159268)
J Bone Miner Res. 2005 Jul;20(7):1185-94. (PMID: 15940371)
CMAJ. 2008 Jun 17;178(13):1660-8. (PMID: 18559803)
Osteoporos Int. 2003 Jun;14(4):334-8. (PMID: 12730741)
JAMA. 1999 Oct 13;282(14):1344-52. (PMID: 10527181)
J Bone Miner Res. 2010 Sep;25(9):1948-57. (PMID: 20499378)
Osteoporos Int. 2010 Jan;21(1):25-33. (PMID: 19705048)
J Bone Miner Res. 2009 Feb;24(2):353-60. (PMID: 19514851)
Osteoporos Int. 2010 Aug;21(8):1317-22. (PMID: 19802507)
Osteoporos Int. 2010 Mar;21(3):381-9. (PMID: 19517155)
Bone. 2004 Aug;35(2):375-82. (PMID: 15268886)
Osteoporos Int. 2008 Apr;19(4):429-35. (PMID: 18292977)
Osteoporos Int. 2005 Nov;16(11):1330-8. (PMID: 15928804)
Osteoporos Int. 2007 Aug;18(8):1033-46. (PMID: 17323110)
Osteoporos Int. 2009 Oct;20(10):1675-82. (PMID: 19291344)
J Bone Miner Res. 2004 Jun;19(6):893-9. (PMID: 15125788)
J Bone Miner Res. 2010 Nov;25(11):2350-8. (PMID: 20499367)
J Bone Miner Res. 2009 Mar;24(3):495-502. (PMID: 19016585)
Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2003 Mar;32(1):1-13, v. (PMID: 12699289)
Endocr Rev. 2002 Aug;23(4):570-8. (PMID: 12202472)
Can Assoc Radiol J. 2005 Jun;56(3):178-88. (PMID: 16144280)
J Bone Miner Res. 2007 Feb;22(2):228-34. (PMID: 17129177)
Can J Surg. 1996 Apr;39(2):105-11. (PMID: 8769920)
Grant Information :
88225-1 Canada Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Contributed Indexing :
Investigator: D Goltzman; N Kreiger; A Tenenhouse; S Poliquin; S Godmaire; C Berger; C Joyce; C Kovacs; E Sheppard; S Kirkland; S Kaiser; JP Brown; L Bessette; T Anastassiades; T Towheed; B Matthews; B Josse; SA Jamal; T Murray; B Gardner-Bray; JD Adachi; A Papaioannou; L Pickard; WP Olszynski; KS Davison; J Thingvold; DA Hanley; J Allan; JC Prior; BC Lentle
Entry Date(s) :
Date Created: 20101217 Date Completed: 20111102 Latest Revision: 20211020
Update Code :
20220301
PubMed Central ID :
PMC5101064
DOI :
10.1007/s00198-010-1465-1
PMID :
21161508
Czasopismo naukowe
Unlabelled: A new Canadian WHO fracture risk assessment (FRAX®) tool to predict 10-year fracture probability was compared with observed 10-year fracture outcomes in a large Canadian population-based study (CaMos). The Canadian FRAX tool showed good calibration and discrimination for both hip and major osteoporotic fractures.
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to validate a new Canadian WHO fracture risk assessment (FRAX®) tool in a prospective, population-based cohort, the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study (CaMos).
Methods: A FRAX tool calibrated to the Canadian population was developed by the WHO Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases using national hip fracture and mortality data. Ten-year FRAX probabilities with and without bone mineral density (BMD) were derived for CaMos women (N = 4,778) and men (N = 1,919) and compared with observed fracture outcomes to 10 years (Kaplan-Meier method). Cox proportional hazard models were used to investigate the contribution of individual FRAX variables.
Results: Mean overall 10-year FRAX probability with BMD for major osteoporotic fractures was not significantly different from the observed value in men [predicted 5.4% vs. observed 6.4% (95%CI 5.2-7.5%)] and only slightly lower in women [predicted 10.8% vs. observed 12.0% (95%CI 11.0-12.9%)]. FRAX was well calibrated for hip fracture assessment in women [predicted 2.7% vs. observed 2.7% (95%CI 2.2-3.2%)] but underestimated risk in men [predicted 1.3% vs. observed 2.4% (95%CI 1.7-3.1%)]. FRAX with BMD showed better fracture discrimination than FRAX without BMD or BMD alone. Age, body mass index, prior fragility fracture and femoral neck BMD were significant independent predictors of major osteoporotic fractures; sex, age, prior fragility fracture and femoral neck BMD were significant independent predictors of hip fractures.
Conclusion: The Canadian FRAX tool provides predictions consistent with observed fracture rates in Canadian women and men, thereby providing a valuable tool for Canadian clinicians assessing patients at risk of fracture.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies