Risk of Peripheral Artery Occlusive Disease in Patients with Vertigo, Tinnitus, or Sudden Deafness: A Secondary Case-Control Analysis of a Nationwide, Population-Based Health Claims Database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cochleovestibular symptoms, such as vertigo, tinnitus, and sudden deafness, are common manifestations of microvascular diseases. However, it is unclear whether these symptoms occurred preceding the diagnosis of peripheral artery occlusive disease (PAOD). Therefore, the aim of this case-control study was to investigate the risk of PAOD among patients with vertigo, tinnitus, and sudden deafness using a nationwide, population-based health claim database in Taiwan. METHODS: We identified 5,340 adult patients with PAOD diagnosed between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2010 and 16,020 controls, frequency matched on age interval, sex, and year of index date, from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Risks of PAOD in patients with vertigo, tinnitus, or sudden deafness were separately evaluated with multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: Of the 5,340 patients with PAOD, 12.7%, 6.7%, and 0.3% were diagnosed with vertigo, tinnitus, and sudden deafness, respectively. In the controls, 10.6%, 6.1%, and 0.3% were diagnosed with vertigo (P < 0.001), tinnitus (P = 0.161), and sudden deafness (P = 0.774), respectively. Results from the multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that the risk of PAOD was significantly increased in patients with vertigo (adjusted odds ratio = 1.12, P = 0.027) but not in those with tinnitus or sudden deafness. CONCLUSIONS: A modest increase in the risk of PAOD was observed among Taiwanese patients with vertigo, after adjustment for comorbidities.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".