MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889156783 · doi:10.1159/000490741

Risk of Hemorrhagic Stroke in Patients Exposed to Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2018· review· en· W2889156783 on OpenAlex
Md. Mohaimenul Islam, Tahmina Nasrin Poly, Bruno Walther, Hsuan‐Chia Yang, Ming‐Chin Lin, Yu‐Chuan Li

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroepidemiology · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInflammatory mediators and NSAID effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStroke (engine)Internal medicineMeta-analysisSubgroup analysisObservational studyRelative riskEpidemiologyConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are one of the most common pain relief medications, but the risk of hemorrhagic stroke in patients taking these medications is unclear. In this study, our aim was to systematically review, synthesize, and critique the epidemiological studies that evaluate the association between NSAIDs and hemorrhagic stroke risk. We therefore assessed the current state of knowledge, filling the gaps in our existing concern, and make a recommendation for future research. METHODS: We searched for articles in PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science between January 1, 1990, and July 30, 2017, which reported on the association between the use of NSAIDs and hemorrhagic stroke. The search was limited to studies published in English. The quality of the included studies was assessed in accordance with the Cochrane guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa criteria. Summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CI were pooled using a random-effects model. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also conducted. RESULTS: We selected 15 out of the 785 unique abstracts for full-text review using our selection criteria, and 13 out of these 15 studies met all of our inclusion criteria. The overall pooled RR of hemorrhagic stroke was 1.332 (95% CI 1.105-1.605, p = 0.003) for the random effect model. In the subgroup analysis, a significant risk was observed among meloxicam, diclofenac, and indomethacin users (RR 1.48; 95% CI 1.149-1.912, RR 1.392; 95% CI 1.107-1.751, and RR 1.363; 95% CI 1.088-1.706). In addition, a greater risk was found in studies from Asia (RR 1.490, 95% CI 1.226-1.811) followed by Europe (RR 1.393, 95% CI 1.104-1.757) and Australia (RR 1.361, 95% CI 0.755-2.452). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that the use of NSAIDs is significantly associated with a higher risk of developing hemorrhagic stroke. These results should be interpreted with caution because they may be confounded owing to the observational design of the individual studies. Nevertheless, we recommend that NSAIDs should be used judiciously, and their efficacy and safety should be monitored proactively.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.004
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.184 · 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