Literature DB >> 17361324

Performance of the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool in ruling out low bone mineral density in postmenopausal women: a systematic review.

B Rud1, J Hilden, L Hyldstrup, A Hróbjartsson.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: The Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) is a simple test that may be of clinical value to rule-out low bone mineral density. We performed a systematic review to assess its performance in postmenopausal women. We included 36 studies. OST performed moderately in ruling-out femoral neck T-score <or= -2.5, but poorly in ruling-out lumbar spine T-score <or= -2.5. Methodological study quality was generally low.
INTRODUCTION: The Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool (OST) is a simple clinical decision rule based on age and weight that may be of clinical value to rule-out low bone mineral density (BMD). Our aim was to systematically assess the performance of OST in postmenopausal women.
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, citation lists and conference proceedings for studies evaluating OST using dual X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) as reference test to measure BMD. We evaluated methodological quality using the QUADAS checklist. Our main outcome was the likelihood ratio of a negative OST result (LR-).
RESULTS: OST performed moderately in ruling-out femoral neck T-score <or= -2.5 in whites, summary LR- (sLR-) 0.19 (95% CI, 0.17-0.21) and between-study heterogeneity was low (I(2) = 7%). The corresponding performance in Asians was similar, sLR- 0.19 (0.14-0.28), but there was considerable heterogeneity (I(2) = 64%). OST performed poorly in ruling-out lumbar spine T-score <or= -2.5 in whites and Asians, sLR- 0.43 (0.31-0.59) and 0.32 (0.28-0.38), respectively. The performance in ruling-out T-score <or= -2.0 in whites was poor regardless of region (sLR- >or=0.28). Methodological study quality was generally low.
CONCLUSIONS: The clinical usefulness of OST is uncertain. OST could be useful for ruling-out femoral neck T-score <or= -2.5, but confirmatory high-quality studies are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17361324     DOI: 10.1007/s00198-006-0319-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoporos Int        ISSN: 0937-941X            Impact factor:   4.507


  50 in total

1.  Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2004-06-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance.

Authors:  Afina S Glas; Jeroen G Lijmer; Martin H Prins; Gouke J Bonsel; Patrick M M Bossuyt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Meta-analysis in clinical trials.

Authors:  R DerSimonian; N Laird
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1986-09

4.  Guidelines for diagnosis and management of osteoporosis. The European Foundation for Osteoporosis and Bone Disease.

Authors:  J A Kanis; P Delmas; P Burckhardt; C Cooper; D Torgerson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  Combining independent studies of a diagnostic test into a summary ROC curve: data-analytic approaches and some additional considerations.

Authors:  L E Moses; D Shapiro; B Littenberg
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1993-07-30       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Reduction of vertebral fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis treated with raloxifene: results from a 3-year randomized clinical trial. Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation (MORE) Investigators.

Authors:  B Ettinger; D M Black; B H Mitlak; R K Knickerbocker; T Nickelsen; H K Genant; C Christiansen; P D Delmas; J R Zanchetta; J Stakkestad; C C Glüer; K Krueger; F J Cohen; S Eckert; K E Ensrud; L V Avioli; P Lips; S R Cummings
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1999-08-18       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Effects of oral ibandronate administered daily or intermittently on fracture risk in postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Authors:  Charles H Chesnut; Arne Skag; Claus Christiansen; Robert Recker; Jacob A Stakkestad; Arne Hoiseth; Dieter Felsenberg; Hermann Huss; Jennifer Gilbride; Ralph C Schimmer; Pierre D Delmas
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2004-03-29       Impact factor: 6.741

Review 8.  Diagnosis of osteoporosis and assessment of fracture risk.

Authors:  John A Kanis
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-06-01       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Validation of dental panoramic radiography measures for identifying postmenopausal women with spinal osteoporosis.

Authors:  Akira Taguchi; Yoshikazu Suei; Mitsuhiro Sanada; Masahiko Ohtsuka; Takashi Nakamoto; Hiroomi Sumida; Koso Ohama; Keiji Tanimoto
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Evaluation of QUADAS, a tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies.

Authors:  Penny F Whiting; Marie E Weswood; Anne W S Rutjes; Johannes B Reitsma; Patrick N M Bossuyt; Jos Kleijnen
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-03-06       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  23 in total

1.  American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis: executive summary of recommendations.

Authors:  Nelson B Watts; John P Bilezikian; Pauline M Camacho; Susan L Greenspan; Steven T Harris; Stephen F Hodgson; Michael Kleerekoper; Marjorie M Luckey; Michael R McClung; Rachel Pessah Pollack; Steven M Petak
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.443

2.  Individualization of osteoporosis risk.

Authors:  T V Nguyen
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2007-07-05       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 3.  The Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool versus alternative tests for selecting postmenopausal women for bone mineral density assessment: a comparative systematic review of accuracy.

Authors:  B Rud; J Hilden; L Hyldstrup; A Hróbjartsson
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  Elevated bone mass: a weighty matter?

Authors:  William D Leslie
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice for the diagnosis and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Authors:  Nelson B Watts; John P Bilezikian; Pauline M Camacho; Susan L Greenspan; Steven T Harris; Stephen F Hodgson; Michael Kleerekoper; Marjorie M Luckey; Michael R McClung; Rachel Pessah Pollack; Steven M Petak
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2010 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.443

6.  Clinical performance of seven prescreening tools for osteoporosis in Iranian postmenopausal women.

Authors:  Abbas Keshtkar; Omidreza Tabatabaie; Nassim Matin; Zahra Mohammadi; Mehdi Ebrahimi; Patricia Khashayar; Mojgan Asadi
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2015-05-17       Impact factor: 2.631

7.  Who should receive bone mineral density testing?

Authors:  Christina Korownyk; James McCormack; G Michael Allan
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.275

8.  Cost-effectiveness of bone densitometry among Caucasian women and men without a prior fracture according to age and body weight.

Authors:  J T Schousboe; M Gourlay; H A Fink; B C Taylor; E S Orwoll; E Barrett-Connor; L J Melton; S R Cummings; K E Ensrud
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2012-02-17       Impact factor: 4.507

9.  An evaluation of osteoporosis screening tools for the osteoporotic fractures in men (MrOS) study.

Authors:  H S Lynn; J Woo; P C Leung; E L Barrett-Connor; M C Nevitt; J A Cauley; R A Adler; E S Orwoll
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-02-01       Impact factor: 4.507

10.  Clinical performance of osteoporosis risk assessment tools in women aged 67 years and older.

Authors:  M L Gourlay; J M Powers; L-Y Lui; K E Ensrud
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2008-01-25       Impact factor: 4.507

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.