MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997779734 · doi:10.1089/jwh.2019.7828

Trends in Prescribing Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Bisphosphonates in Australia and Manitoba, Canada and Adherence to Recommendations

2020· article· en· W2997779734 on OpenAlexaffabout
Usha Salagame, Erich V. Kliewer, Alain Demers, Emily Banks, Louiza S. Velentzis, David Goldsbury, Sam Egger, William D. Leslie, Karen Canfell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Women s Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and osteoporosis research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaBC Cancer AgencyCancerCare Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical prescriptionOsteoporosisBisphosphonatePharmaceutical Benefits SchemeFamily medicineDemographyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Recommendations for using menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) and bisphosphonates for postmenopausal osteoporosis management have changed over time. After the release of the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial results in 2002, new evidence on risks and benefits of MHT became available, and newer guidelines generally specify that MHT should not be prescribed for prevention of chronic disease, including osteoporosis. This raises the question of whether bisphosphonate prescribing changed over time to compensate for the decrease in MHT use. Materials and Methods: We examined trends in dispensed prescriptions in Australia (national) and Canada (province of Manitoba) in relation to prescribing recommendations. Administrative data were used to describe dispensing patterns and changes for persons of all ages from 1996 to 2008, and for women aged 50 to ≥80 years from 2003 to 2008 in Australia and 1996 to 2008 in Canada. Results: In both geographic settings, MHT dispensing increased 1996–2001, peaked in 2001, and declined substantially thereafter (67% reduction in MHT prescriptions for Australia; 64% reduction for Manitoba, Canada to 2008). From 2003 to 2008, the number of MHT prescriptions declined among all age groups in both settings, with the highest declines among women in their 50s. Concurrently, bisphosphonate dispensing increased until 2005 (2001–2005: 260% increase in the number of prescriptions in Australia; 125% increase in Manitoba) and stabilized thereafter, in both settings. Annual bisphosphonate dispensing rates increased 4.1–10.9% for women in their 70s and 80s in Australia and Manitoba during the period studied. Conclusions: Based on dispensed prescriptions data, more recent guidelines for MHT and bisphosphonates use for postmenopausal osteoporosis, which were updated during the study period (and are still consistent with the current guidelines), appear to have been broadly adhered to in both settings.

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)0.007
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Women s HealthSame topicBone health and osteoporosis researchFrench-language works237,207