Comparison of FRAX Scores of Southern California Females of Mexican Descent Using US Hispanic and Mexico Database
2011

Comparison of FRAX Scores for Mexican Descent Women in Southern California

Sample size: 134 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Nasser Keaton M., Focil Augusto, Silverman Stuart L.

Primary Institution: Osteoporosis Medical Center

Hypothesis

Do FRAX estimates for Hispanic women in Southern California differ between the US Hispanic database and the Mexico database?

Conclusion

The comparison between the FRAX databases shows similar absolute risk for major osteoporotic fractures, but differences in hip fracture risk were noted.

Supporting Evidence

  • The study included 134 women of Mexican descent from Southern California.
  • The mean conformity for meeting the interventional threshold was 94.8%.
  • The 10-year absolute risk of major osteoporotic fracture was similar between the two databases.

Takeaway

This study looked at how likely Hispanic women in Southern California are to have bone fractures, comparing two different databases. It found that both databases give similar results for major fractures, but different results for hip fractures.

Methodology

FRAX risk factor data was collected from 134 postmenopausal Hispanic women of Mexican descent in Southern California, and risk scores were calculated using both US Hispanic and Mexico databases.

Potential Biases

The US Hispanic database may underestimate fracture risk for Californian Hispanics due to its broader sampling.

Limitations

The study is limited to 134 subjects and does not determine which database more accurately reflects fracture risk.

Participant Demographics

Participants were postmenopausal Hispanic women over age 40, primarily of Mexican descent.

Statistical Information

P-Value

P = .94 for major osteoporotic fracture; P = .26 for hip fracture

Confidence Interval

95% CI 3.97–5.67 for major osteoporotic fracture using US database; CI 4.06–5.66 using Mexico database

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.4061/2011/531359

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication