MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk of upper gastrointestinal bleeding with oral bisphosphonates and non steroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs: a case‐control study

2009· article· en· W1994835085 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mahyar Etminan, Linda E. Lévesque, J. Mark FitzGerald, James M. Brophy

Bibliographic record

VenueAlimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteVancouver Coastal Health
FundersUniversity of Ghana Business School
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineOdds ratioCohortUpper gastrointestinal bleedingBisphosphonateCohort studyOsteoporosisEndoscopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal injuries including gastric ulcers have been reported with oral bisphosphonate therapy. However, the risk of the more serious upper gastrointestinal bleeding (UGB) especially in the community setting with these drugs remains unknown. Similarly, the risk of UGB among users of both bisphosphonates and non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in the community is also unknown. AIM: To explore the risk of more serious UGB among users of bisphosphonates and the risk of UGB among users of both bisphosphonates and NSAIDs in the community. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study within a cohort of Quebec residents who had received a revascularization procedure from 1995 to 2004. Cohort members were followed up from the date of their first procedure until the earliest of: (1) study outcome, (2) date of death or (3) end of health care coverage. Cases were defined as those with the first diagnosis of a UGB. For each case, 20 controls were selected and matched to the cases by index date, age and cohort entry. Adjusted odds ratios for current use of bisphosphonates, NSAIDs and co-therapy of both drugs were computed. RESULTS: Within the initial cohort, 3253 incident cases of UGBs and corresponding 65 060 matched controls were identified. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for UGB by current users of bisphosphonates was 1.01 (95% CI, 0.72-1.43). Current NSAID use was associated with an increased risk of UGB OR = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.53-1.99. The OR for use of bisphosphonates and NSAIDs was elevated OR = 2.00; 95% CI, 1.12-3.57. This risk was still elevated for users of bisphosphonates and COX-2 inhibitors [OR = 2.38 (95% CI, 1.26-4.50)]. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence of an increase in the risk of UGB among current users of bisphosphonates. The risk of combined NSAID and bisphosphonate therapy was increased, but this risk was not higher than the risk for NSAID users alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlimentary Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207