ReviewThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2026
Approach to personalizing the treatment of osteoporosis.
Review in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite the availability of multiple highly effective pharmacologic therapies for osteoporosis, fracture rates in the United States have plateaued or increased in recent years. At the same time, individuals with osteoporosis are exposed to an abundance of digital health information and frequently seek guidance on nutrition, exercise, and other lifestyle strategies to improve bone health. Many endocrinologists, however, may have limited time or expertise to address these questions comprehensively during routine clinical encounters. Current clinical practice guidelines provide valuable direction on selecting pharmacotherapy based on fracture risk, yet they offer limited guidance on how to personalize treatment plans by integrating patient values, beliefs, and preferences. The aim of this manuscript is to equip clinicians with practical, preference-sensitive strategies to address common concerns raised by postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, including evidence-based guidance on nutrition and on safe, effective resistance, impact, and balance-focused exercises for bone health and fall prevention. We also outline suggested approaches for responding to common concerns among patients who are reluctant to initiate pharmacologic therapy. Through 2 illustrative cases, we highlight how clinicians can integrate pharmacologic options with evidence-based lifestyle guidance and engage patients in shared decision making to develop individualized, goal-concordant care plans. Our goal is to provide clinicians with tools that support more effective, patient-centered conversations and ultimately improve the quality of osteoporosis care.
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.