Patterns of finasteride use in the male populations of four Nordic countries: A cross-national drug utilization study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective Finasteride 5 mg is a drug used to treat prostate hyperplasia. Little is known about its pattern of usage. This cross-national analysis of individual-level data from Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden was undertaken to appraise its usage and describe cross-national differences. Materials and methods Individual-level data from nationwide prescription registers in Denmark (1995-2009), Finland (1997-2010), Norway (2004-2009) and Sweden (July 2005-2011) were used to examine cross-national finasteride utilization patterns in the adult male population (≥15 years). The study presents period prevalences, incidence rates, waiting time distributions and Lorenz curves. Results During the study period, 295,620 men had at least one prescription redemption of finasteride 5 mg, and there were approximately 3 million dispensing events of finasteride prescriptions in the four Nordic countries. Different patterns of finasteride use were observed among the four Nordic countries. The period prevalence was markedly higher in Finland and Sweden than in Denmark and Norway. In 2009, period prevalences were 18.2/1000 males in Finland and 12.0/1000 males in Sweden compared to 6.7/1000 males in Norway and 4.9/1000 males in Denmark. Incidence rates of finasteride use for Finland, Norway and Sweden were about three times that for Denmark in 2008-2009. Long-term use of finasteride was found in all four Nordic countries with a high ratio between prevalent and incident users. Conclusion Despite resemblances regarding political systems and healthcare services in the Nordic countries, differences in finasteride utilization were found across Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".