MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hospitalizations for Upper and Lower GI Events Associated With Traditional NSAIDs and Acetaminophen Among the Elderly in Quebec, Canada

2008· article· en· W2023334764 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Gastroenterology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAcetaminophenConcomitantInternal medicineCohortMedical prescriptionAdverse effectRetrospective cohort studyCohort studyPerforationHazard ratioPopulationConfidence intervalAnesthesiaPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The risk of upper/lower gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events associated with the concomitant use of traditional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (tNSAIDs) with acetaminophen has not been assessed. Among users of these drugs, the concomitant use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) with tNSAIDs may reduce the risk of upper GI adverse events, but its effect on lower GI events is not clear. OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of GI hospitalization (ulceration, perforation, or bleeding in the upper or lower GI tract) among elderly patients taking tNSAIDs or the combination of a tNSAID and acetaminophen with and without a PPI versus those taking acetaminophen alone. METHODS: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study using data obtained from the government of Quebec health insurance agency databases and the hospital discharge summary database. Patients of 65 yr of age or older who filled a prescription for acetaminophen or a tNSAID between January 1998 and December 2004 were entered in the cohort at the date of the first filled prescription from either of these medications (index date). Follow-up ended at the first date of a GI hospitalization, death, or the end of the study period. RESULTS: The cohort included 644,183 elderly patients. These patients received 1,778,541 prescriptions for tNSAIDs (315,222, 17.7% with a PPI), 158,711 for the combination of a tNSAID and acetaminophen (40,797, 25.7% with a PPI), 1,597,725 for acetaminophen (> 3 g/day) (504,939, 31.6% with a PPI), and 3,641,140 for acetaminophen (< or = 3 g/day) (1,031,939, 28.3% with a PPI). Using Cox regression models that adjusted for time-dependent variables (aspirin, anticoagulants, and clopidogrel) and other fixed patient baseline characteristics, we found similar risks of GI hospitalizations among time periods when patients were exposed to either a tNSAID with a PPI, acetaminophen (> 3 g/day) with a PPI, or acetaminophen (< or = 3 g/day) with a PPI. The risk of GI hospitalization among users of PPIs during exposure to the combination of acetaminophen with a tNSAID was twice as high as that of the reference category, acetaminophen (< or = 3 g/day) without a PPI (hazard ratio [HR] 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI][1.35-3.40]). Among nonusers of PPIs, the risk of GI hospitalization was 1.20 (1.03-1.40) during exposure to acetaminophen (> 3 g/day), 1.63 (1.44-1.85) during exposure to tNSAIDs, and 2.55 (1.98-3.28) during exposure to the combination of a tNSAID and acetaminophen compared with the reference category. CONCLUSION: Among elderly patients requiring analgesic/anti-inflammatory treatment, use of the combination of a tNSAID and acetaminophen may increase the risk of GI bleeding compared with either agent 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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