MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparison of nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase‐2 (COX‐2) inhibitors use in Australia and Nova Scotia (Canada)

2009· article· en· W2088179895 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nadia Barozzi, Ingrid Sketris, Charmaine Cooke, Susan E. Tett

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaMedical prescriptionNonsteroidalMedicineCyclooxygenaseProportional hazards modelPharmacologyInternal medicineGeographyChemistryEnzyme

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Cyclo‐oxygenase‐2 (COX‐2) inhibitors were marketed aggressively and their rapid uptake caused safety concerns and budgetary challenges in Canada and Australia. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • The study showed that there were similarities in the anti‐inflammatory prescribing pattern between Australia and Nova Scotia; however, volumes of both ns‐NSAIDs and COX‐2 inhibitors prescribed were higher in Australia in the study period. The remarkable increase observed in Australia in NSAIDs use was essentially due to the much higher COX‐2 inhibitor use. Differences in regulatory and marketing practices, as well as cultural and historical differences might be some of the reasons for differences in the NSAID prescribing between Australia and Nova Scotia. AIMS Cyclooxygenase‐2 (COX‐2) inhibitors were marketed aggressively and their rapid uptake caused safety concerns and budgetary challenges in Canada and Australia. The objectives of this study were to compare and contrast COX‐2 inhibitors and nonselective nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drug (ns‐NSAID) use in Nova Scotia (Canada) and Australia and to identify lessons learned from the two jurisdictions. METHODS Ns‐NSAID and COX‐2 inhibitor Australian prescription data (concession beneficiaries) were downloaded from the Medicare Australia website (2001–2006). Similar Pharmacare data were obtained for Nova Scotia (seniors and those receiving Community services). Defined daily doses per 1000 beneficiaries day −1 were calculated. COX‐2 inhibitors/all NSAIDs ratios were calculated for Australia and Nova Scotia. Ns‐NSAIDs were divided into low, moderate and high risk for gastrointestinal side‐effects and the proportions of use in each group were determined. Which drugs accounted for 90% of use was also calculated. RESULTS Overall NSAID use was different in Australia and Nova Scotia. However, ns‐NSAID use was similar. COX‐2 inhibitor dispensing was higher in Australia. The percentage of COX‐2 inhibitor prescriptions over the total NSAID use was different in the two countries. High‐risk NSAID use was much higher in Australia. Low‐risk NSAID prescribing increased in Nova Scotia over time. The low‐risk/high‐risk ratio was constant throughout over the period in Australia and increased in Nova Scotia. CONCLUSIONS There are significant differences in Australia and Nova Scotia in use of NSAIDs, mainly due to COX‐2 prescribing. Nova Scotia has a higher proportion of low‐risk NSAID use. Interventions to provide physicians with information on relative benefits and risks of prescribing specific NSAIDs are needed, including determining their impact.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.747

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Clinical PharmacologySame topicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effectsFrench-language works237,207