Long‐Term Continuous Use of Benzodiazepines by Older Adults in Quebec: Prevalence, Incidence and Risk Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence and incidence of long-term use of benzodiazepines and to assess patient-, prescriber-, and drug-related risk factors. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: 1,423 community-dwelling older adults in Quebec who participated in the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA1). MEASUREMENTS: Patient characteristics were obtained from the CSHA1 database. These were linked to provincial health insurance data to ascertain benzodiazepine use and prescriber characteristics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Use of benzodiazepines for at least 135 of the first 180 days following initiation of use. RESULTS: Twelve-month prevalence of long-term continuous use, standardized by age and gender to the Quebec population, was 19.8%. Twelve-month cumulative incidence of long-term continuous use was 1.9%. Older patients were more likely to proceed to long-term continuous use. CONCLUSIONS: Risk of long-term continuous use of benzodiazepines seems to increase with age. This association was found to be independent of gender, health status, anxiety, cognitive status, benzodiazepine type, and physician characteristics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".