Table 1.
Summary of key fracture epidemiologic studies in type 1 diabetes
| Year published | Authors | Data source/country | Sex and sge of participants | Sample size | Fracture outcome | Statistical measure of risk | T1D-related fracture risk1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | Forsen et al. [4] | NTHS/Norway | M/F 50–74 years | T1D: 51 No DM: 26,895 |
Incident hip | Relative Risk | M: 4 (0.6,28.2) F: 5.7 (1.8,17.9) |
| 2001 | Nicodemus et al. [5] | IWHS/USA | F 55–69 years | T1D: 47 No DM: 30,377 |
Incident hip | Relative Risk | F: 12.3 (5.1,29.7) |
| 2005 | Miao et al. [6] | Swedish Inpatient Register/Sweden | M/F < 65 years | T1D: 24,605 No DM: not stated |
Incident hip | Standardized Hospitalization Ratio | M: 7.6 (5.9,9.6) F: 9.8 (7.3,12.9) |
| 2005 | Vestergaard, et al.[7] | NHDR/Denmark | M/F all ages | Fracture: 124,655 No fracture: 373,962 Fracture: 10,530 No fracture: 31,535 |
incident, all sites incident hip |
Odds Ratio | M/F: 1.9 (1.8,2.1) M/F 1. (1.3,2.2) |
| 2006 | Janghorbani, et al. [8] | Nurse Health Study/USA | F ≥ 30 years | T1D: 292 No DM: 101,343 |
Incident hip | Relative Risk | F: 7.1 (4.4,11.4) |
| 2006 | Ahmed, et al. [9] | Tromso Study/Norway | M/F ≥ 25 years | T1D: 81 No DM: 26,704 |
Incident non-vertebral | Relative Risk | M: 3.1 (1.3,7.4) F: 3 (0.98,1.4) |
| Incident Hip | M: 17.8 (5.6,56.8) F: 8.6 (1.1, 56.5) |
||||||
| 2013 | Hothersall et al. [10] | SCI-DC/Scotland | M/F 20–84 years | T1D: 21,033 No DM: 3.6 M |
Incident hip | Incident Rate Ratio | M: 3.3 (2.5,4.3) F: 3.5 (2.8,4.6) |
| 2014 | Fraser et al.[11] | CaMos/Canada | M/F > 50 years | T1D: 98 No DM: 7147 |
Incident atraumatic, all sites | Hazard Ratio | M/F: 2.5 (1.6-3.9) |
| 2014 | Liao et al. [12•] | TNHIRD/Taiwan | M/F ≥ 20 years | T1D: 2992 No DM: 64,942 |
Incident, all sites | Hazard Ratio | M/F: 1.2 (1.1,1.4) |
| 2015 | Weber et al. [13••] | THIN/United Kingdom | M/F < 90 years | T1D: 30,394 No DM: 303,872 |
Incident, all sites | Hazard Ratio | M: 1.6 (1.5,1.7) F: 1.7 (1.6,1.8) |
| Incident hip | M: 2.4 (1.9,2.9) F: 2.3 (2,2.7) |
1
M/F denotes males and females grouped together for analysis; 95 % confidence intervals displayed in parenthesis; unadjusted outcomes reported if both unadjusted and adjusted outcomes are provided in literature
CaMos Canadian Multicenter Osteoporosis Study, DM diabetes mellitus, IWHS Iowa Women's Health Study, M million, NHDR National Hospital Discharge Register, NTHS Nord Trondelag Health Survey, SCI-DC Scottish Care Information-Diabetes Collaboration Database, THIN The Health Improvement Network TNHIRD, Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database