MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111071590 · doi:10.1136/thorax.57.5.417

Cardiovascular medication use in patients with undiagnosed obstructive sleep apnoea

2002· article· en· W2111071590 on OpenAlexaffabout
K Otake

Bibliographic record

VenueThorax · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicObstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface Hospital
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMedical prescriptionBody mass indexOdds ratioPediatricsInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A study was undertaken in patients with undiagnosed sleep apnoea/hypopnoea syndrome (OSAS) to document the use of prescribed medications, especially those used in cardiovascular diseases, in the year before the OSAS diagnosis was confirmed. METHODS: A total of 549 patients with OSAS (401 men of mean age 47.2 years, mean body mass index (BMI) 35.5 kg/m(2), mean apnoea/hypopnoea index (AHI) 47.2 and148 women of mean age 50.2 years, BMI 39.6 kg/m(2), AHI 32.6) were each matched to one general population control by age, sex, geographical location, and family physician. Medication use was evaluated for patients and controls using a database containing information about all prescriptions completed in the province of Manitoba, Canada. RESULTS: In the year before OSAS was diagnosed, prescribed medication costs were $155.91 (Canadian dollars) (95% CI $91.34 to $220.49) greater for cases than for controls. Cases were dispensed 3.3 (95% CI 1.5 to 5.2) more prescriptions, were on 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.6) more medications, and were supplied with 157.4 (95% CI 95.9 to 218.8) more daily doses of medication. The odds ratio of OSAS cases being on a prescribed medication was 1.88 relative to controls (95% CI 1.38 to 2.54, p<0.0001). In the same year 36.6% of cases and 19.7% of controls were using medications for cardiovascular disease (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.05 to 3.89, p<0.0001), consuming 79.4 (95% CI 48.9 to 109.8) more daily doses of medication, having been dispensed 1.7 (95% CI 1.0 to 2.4) more prescriptions, and at a $75.26 (95% CI $44.03 to $106.50) greater cost. The odds ratio of patients with OSAS being on medications indicated for the treatment of systemic hypertension was 2.71 (95% CI 1.96 to 3.77) relative to controls; however, such medications might also be prescribed for other indications such as angina pectoris and congestive heart failure, and for the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction. The use of medications indicated for the treatment of systemic hypertension was predicted significantly by age (odds ratio (OR) 1.10 per year), BMI (OR 1.05 per unit), and AHI (OR 1.01 per unit). CONCLUSIONS: In the year before OSAS was diagnosed, patients with OSAS were heavy users of medications, particularly those used to treat cardiovascular diseases.

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)0.000
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 score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations63
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThoraxSame topicObstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchFrench-language works237,207