↓ Skip to main content

Proton-pump inhibitors and risk of fractures: an update meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Osteoporosis International, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
4 news outlets
twitter
8 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
97 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
Title
Proton-pump inhibitors and risk of fractures: an update meta-analysis
Published in
Osteoporosis International, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00198-015-3365-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

B. Zhou, Y. Huang, H. Li, W. Sun, J. Liu

Abstract

To identify the relationship between proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) and the risk of fracture, we conducted an update meta-analysis of observational studies. Results showed that PPI use was associated with a modestly increased risk of hip, spine, and any-site fracture. Many studies have investigated the association of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) with fracture risk, but the results have been inconsistent. To evaluate this question, we performed a meta-analysis of relevant observational studies. A systematic literature search up to February 2015 was performed in PubMed. We combined relative risks (RRs) for fractures using random-effects models and conducted subgroup and stratified analyses. Eighteen studies involving a total of 244,109 fracture cases were included in this meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that PPI use could moderately increase the risk of hip fracture [RR = 1.26, 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) 1.16-1.36]. There was statistically significant heterogeneity among studies (p < 0.001; I (2) = 71.9 %). After limiting to cohort studies, there was also a moderate increase in hip fracture risk without evidence of study heterogeneity. Pooling revealed that short-term use (<1 year) and longer use (>1 year) were similarly associated with increased risk of hip fracture. Furthermore, a moderately increased risk of spine (RR = 1.58, 95 % CI 1.38-1.82) and any-site fracture (RR = 1.33, 95 % CI 1.15-1.54) was also found among PPI users. In this update meta-analysis of observational studies, PPI use modestly increased the risk of hip, spine, and any-site fracture, but no evidence of duration effect in subgroup analysis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 101 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 16%
Student > Postgraduate 14 14%
Researcher 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 10 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Other 26 25%
Unknown 16 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 52 51%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Social Sciences 1 <1%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 23 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 20 March 2019.
All research outputs
#459,147
of 14,526,769 outputs
Outputs from Osteoporosis International
#76
of 2,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,518
of 253,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Osteoporosis International
#3
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,526,769 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
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 253,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.