MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2556957292 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000005262

Increased risk of vertebral fracture in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

2016· review· en· W2556957292 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Chen, Guangqi Cheng, Hantao Wang, Yu Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
Canadian institutionsBC Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisRheumatoid arthritisObservational studySubgroup analysisInternal medicineCohort studyRelative riskConfidence intervalNested case-control studyStudy heterogeneityCohortCase-control studyArthritisSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between rheumatoid arthritis and risk of vertebral fracture has been reported by several observational studies. However, there is no higher-level evidence study, such as meta-analysis, that has investigated the relationship, and its mechanisms are not yet fully clear. This meta-analysis aimed to provide a summary of an observational study of the relationship between rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of vertebral fractures.Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed and EMBASE databases (up to August 1, 2016). We included published observational studies (cohort or case-control design) evaluating the relationship between rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of vertebral fractures. Two reviewers searched and abstracted the data independently. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used throughout the whole analysis.Seven observational studies (2 cohort studies, 2 nested case-control studies, and 3 case-control studies) were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that the pooled RR of vertebral fracture for individuals with rheumatoid arthritis was 2.34 (95% CI 2.05-2.63, I = 35.4%, P for heterogeneity = 0.16). Further subgroup analysis by sex showed that the pooled RRs for both women and men, and only women were 2.14 (95% CI 1.47-2.8, I = 48.5%, P for heterogeneity = 0.12) and 2.39 (95% CI 2.07-2.70, I = 34%, P for heterogeneity = 0.22), respectively. Subgroup analysis by study design showed that the pooled RRs for cohort studies, nested case-control studies, and case-control studies were 2.31 (95% CI 1.95-2.67, I = 4.8%, P for heterogeneity = 0.31), 1.89 (95% CI 1.01-2.77, I = 72.1%, P for heterogeneity = 0.06), and 2.62 (95% CI 2.04-3.91, I = 26.1%, P for heterogeneity = 0.26), respectively.Based on our meta-analysis, rheumatoid arthritis should be regarded as an independent risk factor of vertebral fracture. Further studies are needed to institute prevention and treatment strategies.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.015
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations43
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicRheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesFrench-language works237,207