MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of antihypertensive drug treatments on fracture outcomes: a meta‐analysis of observational studies

2006· review· en· W2039260429 on OpenAlex
Matthew O. Wiens, Mahyar Etminan, S.S. Gill, Bahi Takkouche

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Internal Medicine · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalQueen's UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThiazideRelative riskInternal medicineMeta-analysisConfidence intervalObservational studyAntihypertensive drugCohort studyDiureticBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively pool findings from observational studies on the risk of fracture outcomes associated with exposure to five antihypertensive drug classes: angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, diuretics (in particular thiazide diuretics), beta-blockers, calcium-channel blockers and alpha-blockers. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: Publications listed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS databases, the ISI proceedings, and bibliographies of retrieved articles. Sources were searched from the earliest possible dates through December 2005. REVIEW METHODS: We included case-control and cohort studies presenting relative risks and confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between exposure to antihypertensive agents and fracture outcomes. Data were extracted onto a standardized computer worksheet. Study quality was assessed using a 10-point questionnaire specific to case-control or cohort study design. RESULTS: Fifty-four studies were identified. Pooled estimates were computed using the software HEpiMA. The pooled relative risk (RR) of any fracture with use of thiazide diuretics was 0.86 (95% CI 0.81-0.92) and 1.14 (95% CI 0.84-1.54) with use of nonthiazide diuretics. There was a statistically significant reduction of any fracture with use of beta-blockers, (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.70-0.98). The one study with ACE inhibitor data showed protection (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89). No significant associations were found between fractures and exposure to alpha-blockers or calcium-channel blockers. CONCLUSIONS: Thiazide diuretics and beta-blockers appear to lower the risk of fractures in older adults. However, these agents cannot be recommended as preventive therapies for fractures until data from randomized controlled trials have established their efficacy. Patients who use these inexpensive drugs as treatments for hypertension may also benefit from a reduction in fracture risk.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.235
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.267 · 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