MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150035525 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.100221

Bisphosphonate-associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw in Ontario: A Survey of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

2011· article· en· W2150035525 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Aliya Khan, Lorena P Rios, George K.B. Sándor, Nazir Ahmad Khan, Edmund Peters, Mohammed O Rahman, Cameron M. L. Clokie, Edward Dore, Sacha Dubois

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineOsteonecrosis of the jawOsteoporosisBisphosphonateMetabolic bone diseaseIncidence (geometry)Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jawSurgeryPopulationCancerInternal medicineDentistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Osteonecrosis of the jaw (ONJ) in association with use of bisphosphonate (BP) has been described primarily in cancer patients receiving high-dose intravenous BP. The frequency of the condition in patients with osteoporosis appears to be low. We evaluated the frequency of BP-associated ONJ in Ontario in the cancer population and in those receiving BP for osteoporosis and metabolic bone disease. METHODS: A survey developed by representatives of the Ontario Society of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons was mailed to Ontario oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMFS) in December 2006, asking oral surgeons to provide information on cases of ONJ seen in the previous 3 calendar years (2004 to 2006). OMFS were subsequently contacted by telephone if they had not responded or if they had reported cases of ONJ. The frequency of ONJ in association with BP use was estimated from the number of patients with filled prescriptions for BP in Ontario between 2004 and 2006. The cumulative incidence of ONJ was calculated separately for patients using intravenous (IV) BP for cancer treatment and for patients using oral or IV BP for osteoporosis or other metabolic bone disease. RESULTS: Between 2004 and 2006, 32 ONJ cases were identified. Nineteen patients received IV BP for cancer treatment and 13 patients received oral or IV BP for osteoporosis or metabolic bone disease. Over a 3-year period the cumulative incidence of BP-associated ONJ was 0.442% of cancer patient observations (442 per 100,000) and 0.001% of osteoporosis or other metabolic bone disease observations (1.04 per 100,000). The relative risk of low dose IV/oral BP-associated ONJ was 0.002 (95% CI 0.001, 0.005) compared to high-dose IV BP. Other risk factors for ONJ were present in all cases in whom detailed assessment was available. The median duration of exposure to BP was 42 months (range 36 to 120 mo) and 42 months (range 11 to 79 mo) in osteoporosis patients and cancer patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: Over a 3-year period, the cumulative incidence for BP-associated ONJ was 0.442% of cancer patient observations (442 per 100,000) and 0.001% of osteoporosis or metabolic bone disease observations (1.04 per 100,000). This study provides an approximate frequency of BP-associated ONJ in Canada. These data need to be quantified prospectively with accurate assessment of coexisting risk factors.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations79
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of RheumatologySame topicBone health and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207