FRAX® International Task Force of the 2010 Joint International Society for Clinical Densitometry & International Osteoporosis Foundation Position Development Conference.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors and femoral neck BMD and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) in conjunction with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) assembled an international panel of experts that ultimately developed joint Official Positions of the ISCD and IOF advising clinicians regarding FRAX® usage. As part of the process, the charge of the FRAX® International Task Force was to review and synthesize data regarding geographic and race/ethnic variability in hip fractures, non-hip osteoporotic fractures, and make recommendations about the use of FRAX® in ethnic groups and countries without a FRAX® calculator. This synthesis was presented to the expert panel and constitutes the data on which the subsequent Official Positions are predicated. A summary of the International Task Force composition and charge is presented here.

Official Positions for FRAX® clinical regarding international differences from Joint Official Positions Development Conference of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation on FRAX®.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. Increased risk of fractures is the hallmark of the disease and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and economic burden. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors, femoral neck BMD, country specific mortality and fracture data and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator at the time paper was accepted for publication. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. In order to provide additional guidance to clinicians, a FRAX® International Task Force was formed to address specific questions raised by physicians in countries without FRAX® calculators and seeking to integrate FRAX® into their clinical practice. The main questions that the task force tried to answer were the following: The Task Force members conducted appropriate literature reviews and developed preliminary statements that were discussed and graded by a panel of experts at the ISCD-IOF joint conference. The statements approved by the panel of experts are discussed in the current paper.

Changing healthcare: stakeholder perceptions of the burden of chronic disease and the value of teams, measurements and communication.

Canadian healthcare is changing. Over the course of the past decade, the Health Care in Canada Survey (HCIC) has annually measured the reactions of the public and professional stakeholders to many of these change forces. In HCIC 2008, for the first time, the public's perception of their health status and all stakeholders' views of the burden and effective management of chronic diseases were sought. Overall, Canadians perceive themselves as healthy, with 84% of adults reporting good-to-excellent health. However, good health decreased with age as the occurrence of chronic illness rose, from 12% in the age group 18-24 to 65% for the population =65 years. More than 70% of all stakeholders were strongly or somewhat supportive of the implementation of coordinated care, or disease management programs, to improve the care of patients with chronic illnesses. Concordant support was also expressed for key disease management components, including coordinated interventions to improve home, community and self-care; increased wellness promotion; and increased use of clinical measurements and feedback to all stakeholders. However, there were also important areas of non-concordance. For example, the public and doctors consistently expressed less support than other stakeholders for the value of team care, including the use of non-physician professionals to provide patient care; increased patient involvement in decision-making; and the use of electronic health records to facilitate communication. The actual participation in disease management programs averaged 34% for professionals and 25% for the public. We conclude that chronic diseases are common, age-related and burdensome in Canada. Disease management or coordinated intervention often delivered by teams is also relatively common, despite its less-than-universal acceptance by all stakeholders. Further insights are needed, particularly into the variable perceptions of the value and efficacy of team-delivered healthcare and its important components.

Representational pseudoneglect and reference points both influence geographic location estimates

Our mental representation of the world is far from objective. For example, western Canadians estimate the locations of North American cities to be too far to the west. This bias could be due to a reference point effect, in which people estimate more space between places close to them than far from them, or to representational pseudoneglect, in which neurologically intact individuals favor the left side of space when asked to image a scene.We tested whether either or both of these biases influence the geographic world representations of neurologically intact young adults from Edmonton and Ottawa, which are in western and eastern Canada, respectively. Individuals were asked to locate NorthAmerican cities on a two-dimensional grid. Both groups revealed effects of representational pseudoneglect in this novel paradigm, but they also each exhibited reference point effects. These results inform theories in both cognitive psychology and neuroscience.