Increased Fracture Risk in Patients with Rheumatic Disorders and Other Inflammatory Diseases — A Case-Control Study with 53,108 Patients with Fracture: Table 1.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the risk of hip and vertebral fractures in patients with rheumatic disorders (RD) and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). METHODS: This population-based case-control study assessed the fracture risk of patients with rheumatoid arthritis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), ankylosing spondylitis (AS), systemic lupus erythematosus, polymyositis/dermatomyositis (PM/DM), systemic sclerosis (SSc), Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis (UC). The study cohort comprised 53,108 patients with fracture (66% women) and 370,602 age-matched and sex-matched controls. Conditional logistic regression analysis was performed and results were expressed as OR with corresponding 95% CI. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant increased fracture risk for all RD and for IBD compared with controls. The magnitude of fracture risk was higher for patients with RD (OR 3, 95% CI 2.9-3.2) than for those with IBD (OR 1.6, 1.4-1.8). The OR in RD ranged from 2.6 (1.3-4.9) for SSc to 4 (3.4-4.6) for AS. The largest increased fracture risk for vertebral fractures was seen in AS (OR 7.1, 6-8.4) and for hip fractures in JIA (OR 4.1, 2.4-6.9). CONCLUSION: Our results highlight the existence of an increased fracture risk from a variety of underlying causes in patients with RD and IBD. In many inflammatory diseases, implementation of fracture prevention strategies may be beneficial.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".