Body mass index in male patients with COPD: correlation with low attenuation areas on CT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and objectives Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been associated with AKI. Their association with nephrotic syndrome has not been systematically studied. This study aimed to assess the risk of nephrotic syndrome associated with NSAID use. Design, setting, participants, & measurements A matched case-control study was performed in the UK primary care database. Cases were patients with a first diagnosis of nephrotic syndrome and controls were those without nephrotic syndrome. NSAID exposure (grouped either based on cyclooxygenase enzyme selectivity and chemical groups) was classified as either current (use at the nephrotic syndrome diagnosis date and corresponding date in the control group), recent, or past use. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using unconditional logistic regression analysis. Results We included 2620 cases and 10,454 controls. Compared with non-use, current use of 15–28 days and >28 days of conventional NSAIDs was associated with a higher relative risk of nephrotic syndrome: adjusted OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.70, and OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.55, respectively. Also, recent use (discontinuation 1–2 months before nephrotic syndrome diagnosis date; OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.15) and past use (discontinuation 2 months-2 years; OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.43), but not current use of <15 days (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.46 to 1.31) nor past use (discontinuation >2 years; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.09) were associated with a higher relative risk of nephrotic syndrome as well as past use of selective COX-2 inhibitors (discontinuation 2–24 months; OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.58). Categorization based on chemical groups showed that acetic acid and propionic acid derivatives were associated with a higher risk of nephrotic syndrome. Conclusions The use of conventional NSAIDs was associated with a higher risk of nephrotic syndrome starting from at least 2 weeks of exposure, as well as for recent and past exposure up to 2 years before the diagnosis of nephrotic syndrome. This higher risk appeared mainly attributable to acetic acid and propionic acid derivatives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".