BACKGROUND: A set of nomograms based on the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study predicts the five- and ten-year absolute risk of fracture using age, bone mineral density and history of falls and low-trauma fracture. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of these nomograms among participants in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. METHODS: We included participants aged 55-95 years for whom bone mineral density measurement data and at least one year of follow-up data were available. Self-reported incident fractures were identified by yearly postal questionnaire or interview (years 3, 5 and 10). We included low-trauma fractures before year 10, except those of the skull, face, hands, ankles and feet. We used a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Among 4152 women, there were 583 fractures, with a mean follow-up time of 8.6 years. Among 1606 men, there were 116 fractures, with a mean follow-up time of 8.3 years. Increasing age, lower bone mineral density, prior fracture and prior falls were associated with increased risk of fracture. For low-trauma fractures, the concordance between predicted risk and fracture events (Harrell C) was 0.69 among women and 0.70 among men. For hip fractures, the concordance was 0.80 among women and 0.85 among men. The observed fracture risk was similar to the predicted risk in all quintiles of risk except the highest quintile of women, where it was lower. The net reclassification index (19.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.3% to 32.2%), favours the Dubbo nomogram over the current Canadian guidelines for men. INTERPRETATION: The published nomograms provide good fracture-risk discrimination in a representative sample of the Canadian population.
BACKGROUND: A set of nomograms based on the Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study predicts the five- and ten-year absolute risk of fracture using age, bone mineral density and history of falls and low-trauma fracture. We assessed the discrimination and calibration of these nomograms among participants in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. METHODS: We included participants aged 55-95 years for whom bone mineral density measurement data and at least one year of follow-up data were available. Self-reported incident fractures were identified by yearly postal questionnaire or interview (years 3, 5 and 10). We included low-trauma fractures before year 10, except those of the skull, face, hands, ankles and feet. We used a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Among 4152 women, there were 583 fractures, with a mean follow-up time of 8.6 years. Among 1606 men, there were 116 fractures, with a mean follow-up time of 8.3 years. Increasing age, lower bone mineral density, prior fracture and prior falls were associated with increased risk of fracture. For low-trauma fractures, the concordance between predicted risk and fracture events (Harrell C) was 0.69 among women and 0.70 among men. For hip fractures, the concordance was 0.80 among women and 0.85 among men. The observed fracture risk was similar to the predicted risk in all quintiles of risk except the highest quintile of women, where it was lower. The net reclassification index (19.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.3% to 32.2%), favours the Dubbo nomogram over the current Canadian guidelines for men. INTERPRETATION: The published nomograms provide good fracture-risk discrimination in a representative sample of the Canadian population.
Authors: A Tenenhouse; L Joseph; N Kreiger; S Poliquin; T M Murray; L Blondeau; C Berger; D A Hanley; J C Prior Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2000 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: A A Ismail; S R Pye; W C Cockerill; M Lunt; A J Silman; J Reeve; D Banzer; L I Benevolenskaya; A Bhalla; J Bruges Armas; J B Cannata; C Cooper; P D Delmas; J Dequeker; G Dilsen; J A Falch; B Felsch; D Felsenberg; J D Finn; C Gennari; K Hoszowski; I Jajic; J Janott; O Johnell; J A Kanis; G Kragl; A Lopez Vaz; R Lorenc; G Lyritis; F Marchand; P Masaryk; C Matthis; T Miazgowski; M Naves-Diaz; H A P Pols; G Poor; A Rapado; H H Raspe; D M Reid; W Reisinger; C Scheidt-Nave; J Stepan; C Todd; K Weber; A D Woolf; T W O'Neill Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: Ethel S Siris; Ya-Ting Chen; Thomas A Abbott; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor; Paul D Miller; Lois E Wehren; Marc L Berger Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2004-05-24
Authors: Claudie Berger; Lisa Langsetmo; Lawrence Joseph; David A Hanley; K Shawn Davison; Robert Josse; Nancy Kreiger; Alan Tenenhouse; David Goltzman Journal: CMAJ Date: 2008-06-17 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Zhao Chen; Charles Kooperberg; Mary B Pettinger; Tamsen Bassford; Jane A Cauley; Andrea Z LaCroix; Cora E Lewis; Simon Kipersztok; Carolyn Borne; Rebecca D Jackson Journal: Menopause Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Philip N Sambrook; Julie Flahive; Fred H Hooven; Steven Boonen; Roland Chapurlat; Robert Lindsay; Tuan V Nguyen; Adolfo Díez-Perez; Johannes Pfeilschifter; Susan L Greenspan; David Hosmer; J Coen Netelenbos; Jonathan D Adachi; Nelson B Watts; Cyrus Cooper; Christian Roux; Maurizio Rossini; Ethel S Siris; Stuart Silverman; Kenneth G Saag; Juliet E Compston; Andrea LaCroix; Stephen Gehlbach Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Dima Alajlouni; Thach Tran; Dana Bliuc; Robert D Blank; Peggy M Cawthon; Eric S Orwoll; Jacqueline R Center Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2021-12-08 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: W D Leslie; S N Morin; L M Lix; P Martineau; M Bryanton; E V McCloskey; H Johansson; N C Harvey; J A Kanis Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 4.507
Authors: John A Kanis; Nicholas C Harvey; Helena Johansson; Anders Odén; Eugene V McCloskey; William D Leslie Journal: J Clin Densitom Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 2.617