Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Comparing self-perceived and estimated fracture risk by FRAX® of women with osteoporosis

Comparing self-perceived and estimated fracture risk by FRAX® of women with osteoporosis Arch Osteoporos (2017) 12: 4 DOI 10.1007/s11657-016-0300-5 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Comparing self-perceived and estimated fracture risk by FRAX® of women with osteoporosis 1,2 1 3 1 1 Petra Baji & László Gulácsi & Csaba Horváth & Valentin Brodszky & Fanni Rencz & 1,4 Márta Péntek Received: 12 September 2016 /Accepted: 9 December 2016 /Published online: 21 December 2016 International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2016 Abstract estimates and applied logistic regression to analyze the deter- Summary In this study, we compared subjective fracture risks minants of the underestimation of risk. Associations between of Hungarian women with osteoporosis to FRAX®-based es- risk factors and subjective risk were explored using linear timates. Patients with a previous fracture, parental hip fracture, probability models. low femoral T-score, higher age, and higher BMI were more Results Nine hundred seventy-two OP patients were included likely to underestimate their risks. Patients also failed to asso- in the analysis. Major OP and hip fracture risk by FRAX® ciate risk factors with an increased risk of fractures. were on average 20.1 and 10.5%, while subjective estimates Purpose The main objectives were to explore associations were significantly higher, 30.0 and 24.7%, respectively. between self-perceived 10-year fracture risks of women http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Osteoporosis Springer Journals

Comparing self-perceived and estimated fracture risk by FRAX® of women with osteoporosis

Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/comparing-self-perceived-and-estimated-fracture-risk-by-frax-of-women-4mB6y2vBiQ
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 by International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation
Subject
Medicine & Public Health; Orthopedics; Endocrinology
ISSN
1862-3522
eISSN
1862-3514
DOI
10.1007/s11657-016-0300-5
pmid
28004298
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arch Osteoporos (2017) 12: 4 DOI 10.1007/s11657-016-0300-5 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Comparing self-perceived and estimated fracture risk by FRAX® of women with osteoporosis 1,2 1 3 1 1 Petra Baji & László Gulácsi & Csaba Horváth & Valentin Brodszky & Fanni Rencz & 1,4 Márta Péntek Received: 12 September 2016 /Accepted: 9 December 2016 /Published online: 21 December 2016 International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2016 Abstract estimates and applied logistic regression to analyze the deter- Summary In this study, we compared subjective fracture risks minants of the underestimation of risk. Associations between of Hungarian women with osteoporosis to FRAX®-based es- risk factors and subjective risk were explored using linear timates. Patients with a previous fracture, parental hip fracture, probability models. low femoral T-score, higher age, and higher BMI were more Results Nine hundred seventy-two OP patients were included likely to underestimate their risks. Patients also failed to asso- in the analysis. Major OP and hip fracture risk by FRAX® ciate risk factors with an increased risk of fractures. were on average 20.1 and 10.5%, while subjective estimates Purpose The main objectives were to explore associations were significantly higher, 30.0 and 24.7%, respectively. between self-perceived 10-year fracture risks of women

Journal

Archives of Osteoporosis – Springer Journals

Published: Dec 21, 2016

References

  • Osteoporosis prevention, diagnosis, and therapy
    Klibanski, A; Adams-Campbell, L; Bassford, TL; Blair, SN; Boden, SD; Dickersin, K; Gifford, DR; Glasse, L; Goldring, SR; Hruska, K
  • Osteoporosis: the evolution of a diagnosis
    Lorentzon, M; Cummings, S
  • Quality of life in patients with osteoporosis
    Lips, P; Schoor, NM
  • Timing matters in hip fracture surgery: patients operated within 48 hours have better outcomes. A meta-analysis and meta-regression of over 190,000 patients
    Moja, L; Piatti, A; Pecoraro, V; Ricci, C; Virgili, G; Salanti, G; Germagnoli, L; Liberati, A; Banfi, G
  • A systematic review of the outcomes of osteoporotic fracture patients after hospital discharge: morbidity, subsequent fractures, and mortality
    Nazrun, AS; Tzar, MN; Mokhtar, SA; Mohamed, IN
  • Fracture risk perception study: patient self-perceptions of bone health often disagree with calculated fracture risk
    Grover, ML; Edwards, FD; Chang, Y-HH; Cook, CB; Behrens, MC; Dueck, AC
  • Self-perceived facture risk: factors underlying women’s perception of risk for osteoporotic fractures: the Risk-Stratified Osteoporosis Strategy Evaluation study (ROSE)
    Rothmann, M; Ammentorp, J; Bech, M; Gram, J; Rasmussen, O; Barkmann, R; Glüer, C; Hermann, A
  • Failure to perceive increased risk of fracture in women 55 years and older: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW)
    Siris, ES; Gehlbach, S; Adachi, J; Boonen, S; Chapurlat, R; Compston, J; Cooper, C; Delmas, P; Diez-Perez, A; Hooven, FH
  • A new approach to explaining sick-role behavior in low-income populations
    Becker, MH; Drachman, RH; Kirscht, JP
  • The health belief model: a decade later
    Janz, NK; Becker, MH
  • Testing four competing theories of health-protective behavior
    Weinstein, ND
  • Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: the example of vaccination
    Brewer, NT; Chapman, GB; Gibbons, FX; Gerrard, M; McCaul, KD; Weinstein, ND
  • A meta-analysis of research on protection motivation theory
    Floyd, DL; Prentice-Dunn, S; Rogers, RW
  • Mothers’ preferences and willingness to pay for HPV vaccines in Vinh Long Province, Vietnam
    Poulos, C; Yang, J-C; Levin, C; Van Minh, H; Giang, KB; Nguyen, D
  • Adherence with medications used to treat osteoporosis: behavioral insights
    Schousboe, JT
  • A retrospective longitudinal database study of persistence and compliance with treatment of osteoporosis in Hungary
    Lakatos, P; Takács, I; Marton, I; Tóth, E; Zoltan, C; Lang, Z; Psachoulia, E; Intorcia, M
  • Incorporating adherence into health economic modelling of osteoporosis
    Strom, O; Borgstrom, F; Kanis, JA; Jonsson, B
  • Financial deficits in the health services of the UK and Hungary
    Boncz, I; Sebestyén, A
  • The relationship of perceived risk and biases in perceived risk to fracture prevention behavior in older women
    Jones, SM; Gell, NM; Roth, JA; Scholes, D; LaCroix, AZ
  • The accuracy of osteoporotic fracture risk prediction tools: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Marques, A; Ferreira, RJ; Santos, E; Loza, E; Carmona, L; Silva, JAP
  • Performance of risk assessment instruments for predicting osteoporotic fracture risk: a systematic review
    Nayak, S; Edwards, D; Saleh, A; Greenspan, S
  • Case finding for the management of osteoporosis with FRAX®—assessment and intervention thresholds for the UK
    Kanis, J; McCloskey, E; Johansson, H; Strom, O; Borgstrom, F; Odén, A
  • FRAX updates 2012
    McCloskey, E; Kanis, JA
  • Does osteoporosis therapy invalidate FRAX for fracture prediction?
    Leslie, WD; Lix, LM; Johansson, H; Oden, A; McCloskey, E; Kanis, JA
  • Low self-awareness of osteoporosis and fracture risk among postmenopausal women
    Langer, FW; Silveira Codevilla, AA; Bringhenti, R; Dal Osto, LC; Campos, TR; Martins, TT; Barin, AE; Rigo, PH; Boufleuer, ND; Santinon, SF; Kipper, K; Rodrigues, J; Premaor, MO
  • Ten-year fracture risk by FRAX(®) of women with osteoporosis attending osteoporosis care in Hungary
    Péntek, M; Gulácsi, L; Tóth, E; Baji, P; Brodszky, V; Horváth, C
  • Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis
    Cosman, F; De Beur, S; LeBoff, M; Lewiecki, E; Tanner, B; Randall, S; Lindsay, R
  • Measuring risk perceptions what does the excessive use of 50% mean?
    Bruin, WB; Carman, KG
  • Variations in subjective breast cancer risk estimations when using different measurements for assessing breast cancer risk perception
    Eibner, F; Barth, J; Helmes, A; Bengel, J
  • The measurement of subjective probability: evaluating the sensitivity and accuracy of various scales
    Haase, N; Renkewitz, F; Betsch, C
  • Rounding probabilistic expectations in surveys
    Manski, CF; Molinari, F