Uveitis Risk following Oral Fluoroquinolone Therapy: A Nested Case-control Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of uveitis associated with the use of oral fluoroquinolones. METHODS: Nested case-control study of all patients who visited an ophthalmologist in British Columbia, Canada, between 2000 and 2007, as captured in the British Columbia Health Linked Database. RESULTS: A total 3383 incident cases of uveitis and 33,830 corresponding controls were identified. Among patients who had used oral fluoroquinolones within the past 30 days, the adjusted relative risk of uveitis was 3.53 (95% CI, 2.84-4.39). However, the relative risk of uveitis among patients taking oral macrolides and beta-lactams was also significantly elevated. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not provide convincing evidence of an association between fluoroquinolones and uveitis, as this study found an association between several classes of antibiotics and uveitis. It is possible that the systemic processes for which these antibiotics are being prescribed are in fact the inciting factors for the uveitis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".