MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2148288005 · doi:10.1503/cmaj.121771

Comparative effectiveness of angiotensin-receptor blockers for preventing macrovascular disease in patients with diabetes: a population-based cohort study

2013· article· en· W2148288005 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Tony Antoniou, Ximena Camacho, Zhan Yao, Tara Gomes, David N. Juurlink, Muhammad Mamdani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesF. Hoffmann-La RocheNovo NordiskSanofiGlaxoSmithKlinePfizerAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsTelmisartanMedicineIrbesartanInternal medicineValsartanMyocardial infarctionHazard ratioDiabetes mellitusStroke (engine)PopulationHeart failureCardiologyType 2 diabetesConfidence intervalEndocrinologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Telmisartan, unlike other angiotensin-receptor blockers, is a partial agonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ, a property that has been associated with improvements in surrogate markers of cardiovascular health in small trials involving patients with diabetes. However, whether this property translates into a reduced risk of cardiovascular events and death in these patients is unknown. We sought to explore the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke and heart failure in patients with diabetes who were taking telmisartan relative to the risk of these events occurring in patients taking other angiotensin-receptor blockers. METHODS: We conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study of Ontario residents with diabetes aged 66 years and older who started treatment with candesartan, irbesartan, losartan, telmisartan or valsartan between Apr. 1, 2001, and Mar. 31, 2011. Our primary outcome was a composite of admission to hospital for acute myocardial infarction, stroke or heart failure. We examined each outcome individually in secondary analyses, in addition to all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We identified 54,186 patients with diabetes who started taking an angiotensin-receptor blocker during the study period. After multivariable adjustment, patients who took either telmisartan (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74-0.97) or valsartan (adjusted HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.77-0.95) had a lower risk of the composite outcome compared with patients who took irbesartan. In contrast, no significant difference in risk was seen between other angiotensin-receptor blockers and irbesartan. In secondary analyses, we found a reduced risk of admission to hospital for heart failure with telmisartan compared with irbesartan (adjusted HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.96), but no significant differences in risk were seen between angiotensin-receptor blockers in our other secondary analyses. INTERPRETATION: Compared with other angiotensin-receptor blockers, telmisartan and valsartan were both associated with a lower risk of admission to hospital for acute myocardial infarction, stroke or heart failure among older adults with diabetes and hypertension. Telmisartan and valsartan may therefore be the preferred angiotensin-receptor blockers for use in these patients.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→