MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074853642 · doi:10.2147/cia.s7282

Role of zoledronic acid in the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis

2011· review· en· W2074853642 on OpenAlexaff
Louis-Georges Ste-Marie, Andrée Boucher

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Interventions in Aging · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-LucUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineZoledronic acidOsteoporosisBone Density Conservation AgentsDiphosphonatesMEDLINEInternal medicineOncologyIntensive care medicineBone densityBone resorptionBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taken once a year, intravenous zoledronic acid (Zol) (Reclast® or Aclasta®) is a third-generation nitrogen-containing bisphosphonate that is effective compared with placebo in reducing the risk of fractures in patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis and recent low-trauma hip fracture. In glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, there is no significant difference between Zol and risedronate for new fractures. Improvements in bone mineral density and early reduction of bone remodeling markers are observed in postmenopausal osteoporosis, recent low-trauma hip fracture, and glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis. Given that Zol is generally well tolerated and very convenient, it is an interesting therapeutic option for aging patients who take multiple oral drugs, who have adherence or gastrointestinal tolerance issues, and who have an indication for oral bisphosphonates. Zol is not recommended for patients with severe renal impairment. Vitamin D deficiency should be corrected before the administration of Zol.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.280
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations42
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Interventions in AgingSame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207