MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760495556 · doi:10.1007/s40801-017-0116-7

The Impact of US FDA and Health Canada Warnings Related to the Safety of High-dose Simvastatin

2017· article· en· W2760495556 on OpenAlexafffundabout
K. R. Anand, Ingrid Sketris, Ying Zhang, Adrian R. Levy, John‐Michael Gamble

Bibliographic record

VenueDrugs - Real World Outcomes · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDalhousie UniversityAcadia University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health Research FoundationCanadian Diabetes Association
KeywordsSimvastatinMedicineEnvironmental healthPharmacologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Between 2010 and 2012, the US Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada issued warnings to healthcare professionals emphasizing the increased risk of muscle problems with high-dose simvastatin. OBJECTIVE: To measure the impact of the Health Canada safety warning regarding dose-dependent adverse effects of simvastatin on prescribing of low, medium, and high doses of simvastatin. METHODS: An interrupted time-series design was used to evaluate the impact of a Health Canada safety warning on 7 November 2012 regarding the safety of high-dose simvastatin. Monthly prescription records were analyzed for beneficiaries of the Nova Scotia Seniors' Pharmacare Program aged 65 years or older who had received > 1 prescription of simvastatin between 1 January 1997 and 31 March 2015. Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average models were used to test changes in the proportion of beneficiaries dispensed a low dose (< 40 mg), medium dose (40 mg to < 80 mg), or high dose (≥ 80 mg) of simvastatin over time. RESULTS: There were 219 monthly periods, of which 29 periods occurred after the Health Canada warning. On average during the pre-warning periods there were 2944 simvastatin users per month, of whom 71% were dispensed a low dose, 26% a medium dose, and 2% a high dose. The proportion of beneficiaries dispensed low-dose simvastatin increased by 0.9% (one-sided p value 0.035; 90% CI 0.07-1.65), the proportion dispensed medium-dose simvastatin decreased by 0.7% (one-sided p value 0.0496; 90% CI -1.48 to -0), and there was no significant change in the proportion dispensed high-dose simvastatin (-0.15% change, one-sided p value 0.205; 90% CI -0.45 to 0.15). CONCLUSIONS: The Health Canada Health Care Professional warning had a small effect on increasing the proportion of beneficiaries dispensed low and medium doses of simvastatin but not high doses of simvastatin. Nevertheless, there remain seniors in Nova Scotia receiving high-dose simvastatin for whom the benefit/risk potential may need to be re-evaluated.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.094
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 score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.094
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrugs - Real World OutcomesSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207