↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of Singh Index and Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians as risk assessment tools of hip fracture in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of Singh Index and Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians as risk assessment tools of hip fracture in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13018-017-0539-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhenyu Liu, Hua Gao, Xiaodong Bai, Liang Zhao, Yadong Li, Baojun Wang

Abstract

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), an epidemic disease around world, has recently been identified as a risk factor for osteoporosis-associated fracture. However, there is no consensus on the best method of assessing fracture risk in patients with T2DM. The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the Osteoporosis Self-Assessment Tool for Asians (OSTA) and the Singh Index (SI) in hip fracture risk assessment in patients with T2DM. We enrolled 261 postmenopausal women with T2DM: 87 had hip fracture resulting from low-energy trauma and 174 age-matched controls had no fracture (two controls per fracture case). Bone mineral density (BMD) was measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the lumbar spine and hip region. The SI was obtained from standard antero-posterior radiographs of the pelvis. The OSTA was calculated with a formula based on weight and age. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and tests of difference. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to determine optimum cutoff values, sensitivity, and specificity of screening methods. Discriminative abilities of different screening tools were compared with the area under the curve (AUC). There were significant differences in BMD at all sites (lumbar spine, femoral neck, trochanter, and total hip) and in SI between the fracture and non-fracture groups (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in OSTA between the groups (P > 0.05). The area under the curve was 0.747 (95% CI: 0.680-0.813) for lumbar spine BMD, 0.699 (95% CI: 0.633-0.764) for total hip BMD, 0.659 (95% CI: 0.589-0.729) for femoral neck BMD, 0.631 (95% CI: 0.557-0.704) for trochanter BMD, 0.534 (95% CI: 0.459-0.610) for OSTA, 0.636 (95% CI: 0.564-0.709) for SI, and 0.795 (95% CI: 0.734-0.857) for OSTA plus SI. The AUC for combined OSTA plus SI was significantly superior to other parameters besides BMD of the lumbar spine. The combination of OSTA plus SI could be a clinical alternative tool for screening of hip fracture risk in large diabetic populations. These tests are inexpensive and simple to perform and could be especially useful in areas where BMD measurement is not accessible.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Other 4 6%
Lecturer 3 4%
Other 12 17%
Unknown 30 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 24%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 30 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,536,772
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#961
of 1,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,470
of 310,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#19
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,391 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,523 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.