The accuracy of osteoporotic fracture risk prediction tools: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases

Volumn 74, Issue 11, 2015, Pages 1958-1967

  Marques, Andréa ^a,b   Ferreira, Ricardo J O ^a,b   Santos, Eduardo ^a,b   Loza, Estíbaliz ^c   Carmona, Loreto ^c   Da Silva, José António Pereira ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^b ESCOLA SUPERIOR DE ENFERMAGEM DE COIMBRA   (Portugal)

^c Instituto de Salud Musculoesquelética InMusc Calle Hilarión Eslava   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF COIMBRA   (Portugal)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; CHECKLIST; COMPUTER MODEL FOR OSTEOPOROTIC FRACTURE RISK; FRACTURE AND IMMOBILIZATION SCORE; FRACTURE RISK MODEL; FRACTURE RISK PREDICTION; FRAGILITY FRACTURE; FRAMO; GARVAN; HIP FRACTURE; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QFRACTURE; QUALITY ASSESSMENT TOOL FOR DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY STUDIES; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; SIMPLIFIED FRACTURE RISK SYSTEM; SOF; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WHI; COMPLICATION; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FEMALE; MALE; OSTEOPOROSIS; OSTEOPOROTIC FRACTURES; PHOTON ABSORPTIOMETRY; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; RISK FACTOR; SEX DIFFERENCE;

ABSORPTIOMETRY, PHOTON; AREA UNDER CURVE; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; OSTEOPOROSIS; OSTEOPOROTIC FRACTURES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; ROC CURVE; SEX FACTORS;

EID: 84945178143     PISSN: 00034967     EISSN: 14682060     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-207907     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Papaioannou A, Adachi JD, Parkinson W, et al. Lengthy hospitalization associated with vertebral fractures despite control for comorbid conditions. Osteoporos Int 2001;12:870-4.
2. Wiktorowicz ME, Goeree R, Papaioannou A, et al. Economic implications of hip fracture: health service use, institutional care and cost in Canada. Osteoporos Int 2001;12:271-8.
3. Kanis JA, Melton LJ 3rd, Christiansen C, et al. The diagnosis of osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 1994;9:1137-41.
4. Looker AC, Wahner HW, Dunn WL, et al. Updated data on proximal femur bone mineral levels of US adults. Osteoporos Int 1998;8:468-89.
5. Kanis JA, McCloskey EV, Johansson H, et al. A reference standard for the description of osteoporosis. Bone 2008;42:467-75.
6. Kanis JA, Delmas P, Burckhardt P, et al. Guidelines for diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. The European Foundation for Osteoporosis and Bone Disease. Osteoporos Int 1997;7:390-406.
7. Abu-Rajab RB, Watson WS, Walker B, et al. Peri-prosthetic bone mineral density after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006;88:606-13.
8. Watts NB. Is it ethical to use placebos in osteoporosis clinical trials? Curr Osteoporos Rep 2004;2:31-6.
9. Kanis JA, Johansson H, Johnell O, et al. Alcohol intake as a risk factor for fracture. Osteoporos Int 2005;16:737-42.
10. Kanis JA, Johnell O, Oden A, et al. Smoking and fracture risk: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 2005;16:155-62.
11. Kanis JA, Johansson H, Oden A, et al. A family history of fracture and fracture risk: a meta-analysis. Bone 2004;35:1029-37.
12. De Laet C, Kanis JA, Oden A, et al. Body mass index as a predictor of fracture risk: a meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int 2005;16:1330-8.
13. Johansson H, Kanis JA, Oden A, et al. BMD, clinical risk factors and their combination for hip fracture prevention. Osteoporos Int 2009;20:1675-82.
14. Kanis JA, Johansson H, Oden A, et al. A meta-analysis of prior corticosteroid use and fracture risk. J Bone Miner Res 2004;19:893-9.
15. Kanis JA, Johnell O, De Laet C, et al. A meta-analysis of previous fracture and subsequent fracture risk. Bone 2004;35:375-82.
16. Kanis JA, Borgstrom F, De Laet C, et al. Assessment of fracture risk. Osteoporos int 2005;16:581-9.
17. Papaioannou A, Morin S, Cheung AM, et al. 2010 clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in Canada: summary. CMAJ 2010;182:1864-73.
18. Kanis JA, Hans D, Cooper C, et al. Interpretation and use of FRAX in clinical practice. Osteoporos int 2011;22:2395-411.
19. ®) in clinical practice. J Clin Densitom 2011;14:171-80.
20. Rubin KH, Friis-Holmberg T, Hermann AP, et al. Risk assessment tools to identify women with increased risk of osteoporotic fracture: complexity or simplicity? A systematic review. J Bone Miner Res 2013;28:1701-17.
21. Nayak S, Edwards DL, Saleh AA, et al. Performance of risk assessment instruments for predicting osteoporotic fracture risk: a systematic review. Osteoporos Int 2014;25:23-49.
22. Steurer J, Haller C, Hauselmann H, et al. Clinical value of prognostic instruments to identify patients with an increased risk for osteoporotic fractures: systematic review. PLoS ONE 2011;6:e19994.
23. Nelson HD, Haney EM, Chou R, et al. Systematic Review to Update the 2002 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US), 2010.
24. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264-9, w64.
25. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000100.
26. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29-36.
27. Vergouwe Y, Moons KG, Steyerberg EW. External validity of risk models: use of benchmark values to disentangle a case-mix effect from incorrect coefficients. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172:971-80.
28. Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, et al. The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:25.
29. Whiting PF, Weswood ME, Rutjes AW, et al. Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:9.
30. Moayyedi P. Meta-analysis: can we mix apples and oranges? Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:2297-301.
31. Sousa MR, Ribeiro AL. Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic studies: a tutorial. Arq Bras Cardiol 2009;92:229-38, 35-45.
32. Kanis JA, Oden A, Johnell O, et al. The use of clinical risk factors enhances the performance of BMD in the prediction of hip and osteoporotic fractures in men and women. Osteoporos Int 2007;18:1033-46.
33. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Predicting risk of osteoporotic fracture in men and women in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QFractureScores. BMJ (Online) 2009;339:1291-5.
34. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, et al. Development of a nomogram for individualizing hip fracture risk in men and women. Osteoporos Int 2007;18:1109-17.
35. Ettinger B, Hillier TA, Pressman A, et al. Simple computer model for calculating and reporting 5-year osteoporotic fracture risk in postmenopausal women. J Womens Health 2005;14:159-71.
36. Albertsson DM, Mellstrom D, Petersson C, et al. Validation of a 4-item score predicting hip fracture and mortality risk among elderly women. Ann Fam Med 2007;5:48-56.
37. Albertsson D, Mellstrom D, Petersson C, et al. Hip and fragility fracture prediction by 4-item clinical risk score and mobile heel BMD: a women cohort study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2010;11:55.
38. ® thresholds to identify people with high or low risk of osteoporotic fracture in Spanish female population. Med Clin 2015;144:1-8.
39. Bolland MJ, Siu AT, Mason BH, et al. Evaluation of the FRAX and Garvan fracture risk calculators in older women. J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:420-7.
40. Brennan SL, Leslie WD, Lix LM, et al. FRAX provides robust fracture prediction regardless of socioeconomic status. Osteoporos Int 2014;25:61-9.
41. Cheung EYN, Bow CH, Cheung CL, et al. Discriminative value of FRAX for fracture prediction in a cohort of Chinese postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 2012;23:871-8.
42. Cummins NM, Poku EK, Towler MR, et al. Clinical risk factors for osteoporosis in Ireland and the UK: a comparison of FRAX and Qfracture Scores. Calcif Tissue Int 2011;89:172-7.
43. Donaldson MG, Palermo L, Schousboe JT, et al. FRAX and risk of vertebral fractures: the fracture intervention trial. J Bone Miner Res 2009;24:1793-9.
44. Ensrud KE, Lui LY, Taylor BC, et al. A comparison of prediction models for fractures in older women: is more better? Arch Intern Med 2009;169:2087-94.
45. Ettinger B, Ensrud KE, Blackwell T, et al. Performance of FRAX in a cohort of community-dwelling, ambulatory older men: the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) study. Osteoporos Int 2013;24:1185-93.
46. ® tool: a population-based report from CaMos. Osteoporos Int 2011;22:829-37.
47. ®?-A Danish cohort study on men and women. J Clin Densitom 2014;17:7-15.
48. ® and observed incidence in the Spanish ECOSAP Study cohort. Bone 2012;50:373-7.
49. Hillier TA, Cauley JA, Rizzo JH, et al. WHO absolute fracture risk models (FRAX): do clinical risk factors improve fracture prediction in older women without osteoporosis? J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:1774-82.
50. Leslie WD, Lix LM, Johansson H, et al. Spine-hip discordance and fracture risk assessment: a physician-friendly FRAX enhancement. Osteoporos Int 2011;22:839-47.
51. Leslie WD, Lix LM, Johansson H, et al. Independent clinical validation of a Canadian FRAX tool: fracture prediction and model calibration. J Bone Miner Res 2010;25:2350-8.
52. Leslie WD, Lix LM. Absolute fracture risk assessment using lumbar spine and femoral neck bone density measurements: derivation and validation of a hybrid system. J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:460-7.
53. Pressman AR, Lo JC, Chandra M, et al. Methods for assessing fracture risk prediction models: experience with FRAX in a large integrated health care delivery system. J Clin Densitom 2011;14:407-15.
54. Sambrook PN, Flahive J, Hooven FH, et al. Predicting fractures in an international cohort using risk factor algorithms without BMD. J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:2770-7.
55. Sandhu SK, Nguyen ND, Center JR, et al. Prognosis of fracture: evaluation of predictive accuracy of the FRAX algorithm and Garvan nomogram. Osteoporos Int 2010;21:863-71.
56. Sornay-Rendu E, Munoz F, Delmas PD, et al. The FRAX tool in French women: how well does it describe the real incidence of fracture in the OFELY cohort. J Bone Miner Res 2010;25:2101-7.
57. Sund R, Honkanen R, Johansson H, et al. Evaluation of the FRAX model for hip fracture predictions in the population-based Kuopio Osteoporosis Risk Factor and Prevention Study (OSTPRE). Calcif Tissue Int 2014;95:39-45.
58. ®: a 10-year follow-up survey of the Japanese Population-Based Osteoporosis (JPOS) Cohort Study. Osteoporos Int 2011;22:3037-45.
59. Tanaka S, Kuroda T, Saito M, et al. Urinary pentosidine improves risk classification using fracture risk assessment tools for postmenopausal women. J Bone Miner Res 2011;26:2778-84.
60. Tebe Cordomi C, Del Rio LM, Di Gregorio S, et al. Validation of the FRAX predictive model for major osteoporotic fracture in a historical cohort of Spanish women. J Clin Densitom 2013;16:231-7.
61. Tremollieres FA, Pouilles JM, Drewniak N, et al. Fracture risk prediction using BMD and clinical risk factors in early postmenopausal women: sensitivity of the WHO FRAX tool. J Bone Miner Res 2010;25:1002-9.
62. Premaor M, Parker RA, Cummings S, et al. Predictive value of FRAX for fracture in obese older women. J Bone Miner Res 2013;28:188-95.
63. Lo JC, Pressman AR, Chandra M, et al. Fracture risk tool validation in an integrated healthcare delivery system. Am J Manag Care 2011;17:188-94.
64. Ettinger B, Liu H, Blackwell T, et al. Validation of FRC, a fracture risk assessment tool, in a cohort of older men: the Osteoporotic Fractures in Men (MrOS) Study. J Clin Densitom 2012;15:334-42.
65. Tanaka S, Yoshimura N, Kuroda T, et al. The Fracture and Immobilization Score (FRISC) for risk assessment of osteoporotic fracture and immobilization in postmenopausal women-a joint analysis of the Nagano, Miyama, and Taiji cohorts. Bone 2010;47:1064-70.
66. Henry MJ, Pasco JA, Sanders KM, et al. Fracture Risk (FRISK) Score: Geelong Osteoporosis Study. Radiology 2006:190-6.
67. Henry MJ, Pasco JA, Merriman EN, et al. Fracture risk score and absolute risk of fracture. Radiology 2011;259:495-501.
68. Langsetmo L, Nguyen TV, Nguyen ND, et al. Independent external validation of nomograms for predicting risk of low-trauma fracture and hip fracture. CMAJ 2011;183:E107-14.
69. Nguyen ND, Frost SA, Center JR, et al. Development of prognostic nomograms for individualizing 5-year and 10-year fracture risks. Osteoporos Int 2008;19:1431-44.
70. Collins GS, Mallett S, Altman DG. Predicting risk of osteoporotic and hip fracture in the United Kingdom: prospective independent and external validation of QFractureScores. BMJ 2011;342:d3651.
71. Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C. Derivation and validation of updated QFracture algorithm to predict risk of osteoporotic fracture in primary care in the United Kingdom: prospective open cohort study. BMJ 2012;344:e3427.
72. Van Staa TP, Geusens P, Kanis JA, et al. A simple clinical score for estimating the long-term risk of fracture in post-menopausal women. QJM 2006;99:673-82.
73. Leslie WD, Tsang JF, Lix LM. Simplified system for absolute fracture risk assessment: clinical validation in Canadian women. J Bone Miner Res 2009;24:353-60.
74. Ahmed LA, Schirmer H, Fonnebo V, et al. Validation of the Cummings' risk score; how well does it identify women with high risk of hip fracture: the Tromso Study. Eur J Epidemiol 2006;21:815-22.
75. Hundrup YA, Jacobsen RK, Andreasen AH, et al. Validation of a 5-year risk score of hip fracture in postmenopausal women. The Danish Nurse Cohort Study. Osteoporos Int 2010;21:2135-42.
76. Tremollieres F, Cochet T, Cohade C, et al. Fracture risk in early postmenopausal women assessed using FRAX. Joint Bone Spine 2010;77:345-8.
77. Gustavson K, Von Soest T, Karevold E, et al. Attrition and generalizability in longitudinal studies: findings from a 15-year population-based study and a Monte Carlo simulation study. BMC Public Health 2012;12:918.
78. Brilleman SL, Pachana NA, Dobson AJ. The impact of attrition on the representativeness of cohort studies of older people. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010;10:71.
79. Cook NR. Statistical evaluation of prognostic versus diagnostic models: beyond the ROC curve. Clin Chem 2008;54:17-23.
80. Cook NR. Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction. Circulation 2007;115:928-35.
81. Kanis JA, Oden A, Johansson H, et al. Pitfalls in the external validation of FRAX. Osteoporos Int 2012;23:423-31.
82. Santos E, Cunha M. Interpretação Crítica dos Resultados Estatísticos de uma Meta-Análise: Estratégias Metodológicas. Millenium 2013;44:85-98.