Levothyroxine dose and risk of fractures in older adults: nested case-control study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effect of levothyroxine dose on risk of fractures in older adults. DESIGN: Nested case-control study. SETTING: Population based health databases, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged 70 or more prescribed levothyroxine between 1 April 2002 and 31 March 2007 and followed for fractures until 31 March 2008. Cases were cohort members admitted to hospital for any fracture, matched with up to five controls from within the cohort who had not yet had a fracture. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was fracture (wrist or forearm, shoulder or upper arm, thoracic spine, lumbar spine and pelvis, hip or femur, or lower leg or ankle) in relation to levothyroxine use (current, recent past, remote). Risk among current users was compared between those prescribed high, medium, and low cumulative levothyroxine doses in the year before fracture. RESULTS: Of 213,511 prevalent levothyroxine users identified, 22,236 (10.4%) experienced a fracture over a mean 3.8 years of follow-up, 18,108 (88%) of whom were women. Compared with remote levothyroxine use, current use was associated with a significantly higher risk of fracture (adjusted odds ratio 1.88, 95% confidence interval 1.71 to 2.05), despite adjustment for numerous risk factors. Among current users, high and medium cumulative doses (>0.093 mg/day and 0.044-0.093 mg/day) were associated with a significantly increased risk of fracture compared with low cumulative doses (<0.044 mg/day): 3.45 (3.27 to 3.65) and 2.62 (2.50 to 2.76), respectively. CONCLUSION: Among adults aged 70 or more, current levothyroxine treatment was associated with a significantly increased risk of fracture, with a strong dose-response relation. Ongoing monitoring of levothyroxine dose is important to avoid overtreatment in this population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".