MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593148984 · doi:10.1097/md.0000000000006239

Effect of contraindicated drugs for heart failure on hospitalization among seniors with heart failure

2017· article· en· W2593148984 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Catherine Girouard, Jean‐Pierre Grégoire, Paul Poirier, Jocelyne Moisan

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité LavalThe Quebec Population Health Research Network
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversité LavalPfizer CanadaSanofiMerck CanadaAstraZeneca CanadaAstraZenecaServierPfizer
KeywordsMedicineOdds ratioConfidence intervalHeart failureNifedipinePopulationLogistic regressionInternal medicineDrug classEmergency medicineDrugPharmacologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about the effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), thiazolidinediones (TZDs), nifedipine and nondihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) usage on the risk of all-cause hospitalization among seniors with heart failure (HF). We assessed the risk of all-cause hospitalization associated with exposure to each of these drug classes, in a population of seniors with HF.Using the Quebec provincial databases, we conducted a nested case-control study in a population of individuals aged ≥65 with a first HF diagnosis between 2000 and 2009. Patients were considered users of a potentially inappropriate drug class if their date of hospital admission occurred in the interval between the date of the last drug claim and the end date of its days' supply. The risks of hospitalization were estimated using multivariate conditional logistic regression.Of the 128,853 individuals included in the study population, 101,273 (78.6%) were hospitalized. When compared to nonusers, users of NSAIDs (adjusted odds ratio: 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 1.13-1.20), TZD (1.09; 1.04-1.14), and CCBs (1.03; 1.01-1.05) had an increased risk of all-cause hospitalization, but not the users of nifedipine (1.00; 0.97-1.03).Seniors with HF exposed to a potentially inappropriate drug class are at increased risk of worse health outcomes. Treatment alternatives should be considered, as they are available.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.105
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicineSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207