Myocardial infarction and third generation oral contraceptives: aggregation of recent studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Arterial cardiovascular and cerebrovascular adverse events associated with oral contraceptives (OC) are a major concern to the clinician. This paper aggregates the findings of seven recent oral contraceptive studies on the risk of acute myocardial infarction (MI) among users of second (2gen) and third (3gen) generation OC. METHODS: Odds ratios (OR) from seven original studies published between 1996 and 2001 underwent meta-analysis. They had accrued 6464 subjects since 1996. In addition, estimates of 22 studies published from 1965 to 1966 were synthesized using medians and ranges as an historical point of reference. RESULTS: Four meta-analyses were performed for each of the relevant comparisons. The point estimates for 3gen versus 2gen OC ranged from 0.44 (0.24-0.80) to 0.62 (0.38-0.99). Compared with non-users, the aggregated OR for 3gen OC was 1.13 (0.66-1.92); for 2gen OC it was 2.18 (1.62-2.94). CONCLUSIONS: This overview of seven controlled observational studies confirms that 3gen OC do not convey harm in regard to MI compared with non-users of OC. The aggregate data and the continuing replication of findings allow interpretation of benefit compared with older combined OC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".