MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cardiovascular Safety of Inhaled Long-Acting Bronchodilators in Individuals With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

2013· article· en· W2014032502 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrea S. Gershon, Ruth Croxford, Andrew Calzavara, Teresa To, Matthew B. Stanbrook, Ross Upshur, Thérèse A. Stukel

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Internal Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineCOPDEmergency departmentOdds ratioAnticholinergicInternal medicineEmergency medicinePopulationRetrospective cohort studyAsthmaPropensity score matchingCohortIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and deadly disease. Long-acting inhaled β-agonists and anticholinergics, first-line medications for COPD, have been associated with increased risk of cardiovascular outcomes. When choosing between the medications, patients and physicians would benefit from knowing which has the least risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of these classes of medications with the risk of hospitalizations and emergency department visits for cardiovascular events. DESIGN: We conducted a nested case-control analysis of a retrospective cohort study. We compared the risk of events between patients newly prescribed inhaled long-acting β-agonists and anticholinergics, after matching and adjusting for prognostic factors. SETTING: Health care databases from Ontario, the largest province of Canada, with a multicultural population of approximately 13 million. PARTICIPANTS: All individuals 66 years or older meeting a validated case definition of COPD, based on health administrative data, and treated for COPD from September 1, 2003, through March 31, 2009. EXPOSURE: New use of an inhaled long-acting β-agonist or long-acting anticholinergic. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: An emergency department visit or a hospitalization for a cardiovascular event. RESULTS: Of 191 005 eligible patients, 53 532 (28.0%) had a hospitalization or an emergency department visit for a cardiovascular event. Newly prescribed long-acting inhaled β-agonists and anticholinergics were associated with a higher risk of an event compared with nonuse of those medications (respective adjusted odds ratios, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.12-1.52; P < .001] and 1.14 [1.01-1.28; P = .03]). We found no significant difference in events between the 2 medications (adjusted odds ratio of long-acting inhaled β-agonists compared with anticholinergics, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.95-1.38; P = .16]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among older individuals with COPD, new use of long-acting β-agonists and anticholinergics is associated with similar increased risks of cardiovascular events. Close monitoring of COPD patients requiring long-acting bronchodilators is needed regardless of drug class.

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)0.006
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations184
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Internal MedicineSame topicChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchFrench-language works237,207