Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Meta-analysis of fluoridation and fractures has been done
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITOR
The article by McDonagh et al is valuable but not necessarily
new in the area of fractures.1 They conclude that the
evidence relating fluoridation to fractures is weak and shows no
significant effect either way. This is identical to the conclusion that
we published in a 1999 meta-analysis not cited by McDonagh et al but
listed on Medline.2 This study located 26 studies in this
area, compared with their 20, and reported a relative risk for fracture
of 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.09). Interestingly, sex,
urbanicity index, and the quality (but not duration) of the study
explained 25% of the variation between studies in meta-regression.
Further work in this area will need to be done at an individual level
to advance this field, but even this is problematic given the paper by
Phipps et al in the same issue of the journal, which reports on a very
large cohort of women.3