SynthesisAge and ageing2026
Health-related quality of life instruments for older persons with osteoporosis: a WHO-BOHEG systematic review of measurement properties for use in clinical trials and routine practice.
Synthesis in Age and ageing, 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
30 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOsteoporosis increases fracture risk in older adults and is associated with impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments are widely used, but their measurement performance in older populations has not been comprehensively synthesised.
objectiveTo systematically identify and synthesise development and validation studies of osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments for older adults, and to appraise their measurement properties using COSMIN criteria and a modified GRADE approach to inform instrument selection for clinical trials, routine care, and research.
designSystematic review.
settingCommunity-dwelling; Long-term care facility; Primary care facility. SUBJECTS: Older persons aged 60 years or over.
methodsWe searched Medline (Ovid), Embase, PsycINFO (Ovid), and AMED (Ovid) from inception to August 2024. We extracted and appraised evidence for COSMIN-defined measurement properties: content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, cross-cultural validity or measurement invariance, reliability, measurement error, criterion validity, hypothesis testing for construct validity, and responsiveness. Methodological quality was assessed using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, measurement properties were rated against COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties, and certainty of evidence was graded using a modified GRADE approach.
resultsForty-three studies reported the development and/or validation of nine osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments; language and version adaptations resulted in 15 instrument variants. Content validity was the most prominent limitation: only OPTQoL and the English Mini-OQLQ demonstrated sufficient evidence for multiple content validity components, while most widely used instruments lacked adequate evidence on item relevance, comprehensiveness, or comprehensibility. Evidence for internal structure was limited, with structural validity sufficient for ECOS-16 and QoLOS-NVFX, insufficient for QUALEFFO-41, and indeterminate for most other instruments. Cross-cultural validity and measurement invariance were almost entirely unexamined. By contrast, reliability and hypothesis testing for construct validity were more consistently supported, often with moderate-to-high certainty. Measurement error, interpretability, and responsiveness were poorly reported across instruments.
conclusionsThe evidence base supports purpose-driven selection of osteoporosis-specific HRQoL instruments rather than a single preferred instrument. Across included studies, ECOS-16 shows the most consistently supported measurement properties in older adults for longitudinal assessment, although important evidence gaps remain (notably measurement error and cross-cultural validity). When brevity is the primary feasibility constraint in routine care, the Mini-OQLQ may be considered; however, evidence for responsiveness is limited.
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.