MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946390076 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2019-318352

Incidences, temporal trends and risks of hospitalisation for gastrointestinal bleeding in new or chronic low-dose aspirin users after treatment for <i>Helicobacter pylori</i>: a territory-wide cohort study

2019· article· en· W2946390076 on OpenAlexaff
Chuan‐Guo Guo, Ka Shing Cheung, Feifei Zhang, Esther W. Chan, Lijia Chen, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Wai K. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueGut · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAspirinHelicobacter pyloriMedicineCohortGastrointestinal bleedingCohort studyInternal medicineLow dose aspirinGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: (HP) eradication remains poorly defined. We characterised the incidences and temporal trends of hospitalisations for all GIB in aspirin users after HP eradication therapy. DESIGN: Based on a territory-wide health database, we identified all patients who had received the first course of clarithromycin-based triple therapy between 2003 and 2012. Patients were divided into three cohorts according to aspirin use: new users (commenced after HP eradication), chronic users (commenced before and resumed after HP eradication) and non-users. The primary outcome was to determine the risk of hospitalisation for GIB. RESULTS: We included 6985 new aspirin users, 5545 chronic users and 48 908 non-users. The age-adjusted and sex-adjusted incidence of hospitalisation for all GIB in new, chronic and non-users was 10.4, 7.2 and 4.6 per 1000 person-years, respectively. Upper and lower GIB accounted for 34.7% and 45.3% of all bleeding, respectively. Compared with chronic users, new users had a higher risk of GIB (HR with propensity score matching: 1.89; 95% CI 1.29 to 2.70). Landmark analysis showed that the increased risk in new aspirin users was only observed in the first 6 months for all GIB (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.13) and upper GIB (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.38 to 4.60), but not for lower GIB. CONCLUSION: New aspirin users had a higher risk of GIB than chronic aspirin users, particularly during the initial 6 months. Lower GIB is more frequent than upper GIB in aspirin users who had HP eradicated.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGutSame topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207