Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and healing of hip fracture in Alzheimer's disease patients: a retrospective cohort study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to assess effects of cholinergic stimulation using acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (AChEIs), a group of drugs that stimulate cholinergic receptors and are used to treat Alzheimer's disease (AD), on healing of hip fractures. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using 46-female AD patients, aged above 75 years, who sustained hip fractures. Study analyses included the first 6-months after hip fracture fixation procedure. Presence of AChEIs was used as predictor variable. Other variables that could affect study outcomes: age, body mass index (BMI), mental state or type of hip fracture, were also included. Radiographic union at fracture site (Hammer index), bone quality (Singh index) and fracture healing complications were recorded as study outcomes. The collected data was analyzed by student's-t, Mann-Whitney-U and chi-square tests. RESULTS: No significant differences in age, BMI, mental state or type of hip fracture were observed between AChEIs-users and nonusers. However, AChEIs-users had better radiographic union at the fracture site (relative risk (RR),2.7; 95%confidence interval (CI),0.9-7.8), better bone quality (RR,2.0; 95%CI,1.2-3.3) and fewer healing complications (RR,0.8; 95%CI,0.7-1.0) than nonusers. CONCLUSION: In elderly female patients with AD, the use of AChEIs might be associated with an enhanced fracture healing and minimized complications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".