SynthesisInternational journal of rheumatic diseases2026
Romosozumab Versus Teriparatide for the Treatment of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis: An Overview of Systematic Reviews With Direct and Indirect Meta-Analyses.
Synthesis in International journal of rheumatic diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo summarize the evidence of efficacy and safety of romosozumab compared to teriparatide for postmenopausal osteoporosis.
methodsA literature search was performed in Medline, the Cochrane Library, CRD, and LILACS until November 2023. We included systematic reviews with meta-analyses on the use of romosozumab compared to teriparatide in women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Two authors performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment using AMSTAR-2 and GRADE tools.
resultsA total of 725 records were identified, and 13 studies fully met the eligibility criteria. Regarding efficacy, romosozumab did not show a significant difference in risk of falls (12/24 months), vertebral fractures (12/36 months), non-vertebral fractures (12/36 months), and hip fractures compared to teriparatide. For the safety profile, romosozumab did not show significant change compared to teriparatide for serious adverse events (12/26 months) and composite cardiovascular outcomes (3PMACE and 4PMACE). The overall quality of evidence in the reviews ranged from very low to moderate, primarily due to indirectness and imprecision in the outcomes. Additionally, the reviews were classified as having "low" or "critically low" methodological quality.
conclusionRomosozumab demonstrated efficacy and safety similar to teriparatide. However, this overview revealed substantial overlap among primary studies, with most outcomes assessed through indirect comparisons and poor methodological quality. Future research should confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.