MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

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

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

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.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.053
Bibliometrics0.0080.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.235
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

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

Study designMeta-analysis
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations175
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Internal MedicineSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207