American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 132, No. 1: 123-135
Copyright © 1990 by The Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health
research-article |
PREDICTION OF OSTEOPOROTIC FRACTURES IN THE GENERAL POPULATION BY A FRACTURE RISK SCORE
A 9-YEAR FOLLOW-UP AMONG MIDDLE-AGED WOMEN
1Department of Epidemiology, Medical School, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
2Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden State University Hospital Leiden, The Netherlands
3Department of Internal Medicine III, University Hospital Dijkzigt, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Reprint requests to Dr. Albert M. van Hemert, Department of Clinical Epidemiology, State University Hospital, Bldg. 1 CO-P, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands
The possibility of predicting the occurrence of fractures on the basis of risk factors for osteoporosis was evaluated between 1975 and 1986 in a follow-up study of 1,014 women aged 45–64 years from a Dutch population sample. During the 9-year period of follow-up, 16% of the women experienced one or more fractures. Of 12 historical and radiologic risk factors for osteoporosis which are considered important in the biomedical literature, none were found to be strong indicators of future fractures. Complete information on risk factors was available for 742 women. A fracture risk score was calculated for each person by combining the simultaneous influence of several risk factors in a multivariate analysis. The risk score discriminated relatively well between women with high and low risks of fractures. The risk ratio between the highest and the lowest risk score quintiles was 6.4 for all fractures and 7.0 for type I osteoporotic fractures (fractures of the vertebral bodies and distal forearm). However, if belonging to the highest quintile was considered as a screening test for fracture prediction, the sensitivity and specificity were poor: 0.37 and 0.84, respectively, for all fractures and 0.48 and 0.83, respectively, for type I osteoporotic fractures. These results indicate that it might not be efficient to use risk factor status to select women for fracture prevention programs.
follow-up studies; fractures; osteoporosis; risk factors
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  P. Gerdhem and K. Akesson Rates of fracture in participants and non-participants in the Osteoporosis Prospective Risk Assessment Study J Bone Joint Surg Br, December 1, 2007; 89-B(12): 1627 - 1631. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. F. Mauck, M.-T. Cuddihy, E. J. Atkinson, and L. J. Melton III Use of Clinical Prediction Rules in Detecting Osteoporosis in a Population-Based Sample of Postmenopausal Women Arch Intern Med, March 14, 2005; 165(5): 530 - 536. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K Thomason, J West, R F A Logan, C Coupland, and G K T Holmes Fracture experience of patients with coeliac disease: a population based survey Gut, April 1, 2003; 52(4): 518 - 522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. D. Nelson, M. Helfand, S. H. Woolf, and J. D. Allan Screening for Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med, September 17, 2002; 137(6): 529 - 541. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. S. Kovacs and H. M. Kronenberg Maternal-Fetal Calcium and Bone Metabolism During Pregnancy, Puerperium, and Lactation Endocr. Rev., December 1, 1997; 18(6): 832 - 872. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. D. Ross Osteoporosis: Frequency, Consequences, and Risk Factors Arch Intern Med, July 8, 1996; 156(13): 1399 - 1411. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|