MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044785380 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.111752

Inflammatory ocular adverse events with the use of oral bisphosphonates: a retrospective cohort study

2012· article· en· W2044785380 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mahyar Etminan, Farzin Forooghian, David Maberley

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRetrospective cohort studyScleritisCohortAdverse effectRelative riskCohort studyIncidence (geometry)Rate ratioHazard ratioInternal medicineConfidence intervalUveitisSurgeryOphthalmology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There have been several published reports of inflammatory ocular adverse events, mainly uveitis and scleritis, among patients taking oral bisphosphonates. We examined the risk of these adverse events in a pharmacoepidemiologic cohort study. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving residents of British Columbia who had visited an ophthalmologist from 2000 to 2007. Within the cohort, we identified all people who were first-time users of oral bisphosphonates and who were followed to the first inflammatory ocular adverse event, death, termination of insurance or the end of the study period. We defined an inflammatory ocular adverse event as scleritis or uveitis. We used a Cox proportional hazard model to determine the adjusted rate ratios. As a sensitivity analysis, we performed a propensity-score-adjusted analysis. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 934,147 people, including 10,827 first-time users of bisphosphonates and 923,320 nonusers. The incidence rate among first-time users was 29/10,000 person-years for uveitis and 63/10,000 person-years for scleritis. In contrast, the incidence among people who did not use oral bisphosphonates was 20/10,000 person-years for uveitis and 36/10,000 for scleritis (number needed to harm: 1100 and 370, respectively). First-time users had an elevated risk of uveitis (adjusted relative risk [RR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.68) and scleritis (adjusted RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.34-1.68). The rate ratio for the propensity-score-adjusted analysis did not change the results (uveitis: RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.29-1.73; scleritis: RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.39-1.70). INTERPRETATION: People using oral bisphosphonates for the first time may be at a higher risk of scleritis and uveitis compared to people with no bisphosphonate use. Patients taking bisphosphonates must be familiar with the signs and symptoms of these conditions, so that they can immediately seek assessment by an ophthalmologist.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.256
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations78
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association JournalSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207