Evidence mapPaperPMID 39664931Full record

ArticleJBMR plus2025

Cost-effectiveness of radiofrequency echographic multi-spectrometry for the diagnosis of osteoporosis in the United States.

Jean-Yves Reginster, Stuart L Silverman, Majed Alokail, Nasser Al-Daghri, Mickael Hiligsmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JBMR plus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Bone mineral density assessment using radiofrequency echographic multispectrometry (REMS) in patients before and after total hip replacement.Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jean-Yves ReginsterBiochemistry Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Stuart L SilvermanCedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles and the OMC Clinical Research Center, Beverly Hills, CA 90211, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5313-1018
Majed AlokailBiochemistry Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Nasser Al-DaghriBiochemistry Department, College of Science, King Saud University, Riyadh 11451, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Mickael HiligsmannDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 6229 GT, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4274-9258

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radiofrequency echographic multi-spectrometry (REMS) is an innovative, non-ionizing diagnostic technique that has shown high accuracy and precision, making it a promising alternative to DXA for osteoporosis diagnosis in clinical settings. With economic considerations playing an increasingly crucial role in healthcare decisions, this study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and economic impact of improved osteoporosis diagnosis using REMS followed by treatment in the United States. A microsimulation-based Markov model was constructed to estimate the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (in US$2022) for REMS followed by treatment vs no diagnosis and treatment in US women aged 50 yr and older with osteoporosis. Women were categorized as high risk (receiving alendronate monotherapy for 5 yr) or very high risk (receiving an 18-mo course of anabolic treatment, abaloparatide, followed by 5 yr of alendronate). The study evaluated 2 medication adherence scenarios: one assuming full adherence to treatment and the other reflecting real-world adherence. The results indicate that REMS followed by treatment is associated with improved health outcomes, including more QALYs and fewer fractures, and reduced fracture-related costs compared to no diagnosis and treatment. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of REMS was estimated at $33 891 and $49 198 per QALY gained, under the full adherence and real-world adherence scenarios, respectively. These values are below the US cost-effectiveness threshold of $100 000 per QALY. Moreover, a 5% increase in the diagnosis and treatment of women over 50 yr at high and very high risk of fractures using REMS is projected to save approximately 30 000 life yr, 43 500 QALYs, and prevent 100 000 fractures over a lifetime under real-world medication adherence. In conclusion, this study suggests that REMS is a cost-effective strategy for the diagnosis and management of osteoporosis in US women, offering substantial potential economic benefits and improved health outcomes.

Indexed as

cost-effectivenessdiagnosiseconomicfracture preventionosteoporosisREMS

Identifiers

PMID39664931
PMCPMC11631096

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.