MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Bone health practices in men on androgen deprivation therapy (ADT): A population-based analysis of 25,802 patients

2009· article· en· W3080408553 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. M. Alibhai, Minh Duong-Hua, Rinku Sutradhar, Alice M.S. Cheung, Neil Fleshner, Padraig Warde, Lawrence Paszat

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone health and treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAndrogen deprivation therapyOsteoporosisProstate cancerBone mineralPopulationDiagnosis codePediatricsInternal medicinePhysical therapySurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9631 Background: ADT is used in up to 1 in 2 men with prostate cancer. Osteoporosis and fragility fractures are important side effects of ADT. Guidelines recommend 2 important bone health practices for men on ADT - measurement of bone mineral density with dual x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and use of bisphosphonates in men at risk of osteoporosis. The implementation of these guidelines in practice is not well known. Methods: Using linked administrative databases, we identified 25,802 men (mean age 75.9 y, range 66–100 y) with prostate cancer who were treated with at least 6 months of ADT or who underwent bilateral orchiectomy in Ontario, Canada between 1995 and 2005. Performance of DEXA and prescription of bisphosphonates were captured using specific procedure codes and drug identification numbers, respectively. Prior use of DEXA and bisphosphonates, as well as prior diagnoses of osteoporosis and fragility fracture, were captured with specific diagnostic codes and a 3 y look-back period. Annual rates per 100 person-years were determined for both outcomes. Results: Among 25,802 men, 3.09% had a DEXA more than one year prior to starting ADT, and 3.14% had a prior diagnosis of osteoporosis. Within 2 years of starting ADT, the rate of undergoing DEXA rose from 0.50 per 100 person-years in 1995 to 19.47 in 2005. Rates of DEXA testing were higher among those with a prior diagnosis of osteoporosis, prior DEXA test, or prior fragility fracture but did not reach rates above 50 per 100 person-years in any of these groups. Bisphosphonate use increased from 0.27 per 100 person-years in 1995 to 3.18 in 2005 among prior non-users. More men on ADT were started on a bisphosphonate in the third year after starting ADT as compared to the second year, and rates were higher in year 2 than year 1. Less than one-third of men starting a bisphosphonate underwent any DEXA testing within 12 months of bisphosphonate initiation. Conclusions: Rates of DEXA testing and bisphosphonate use have increased over time among older men starting ADT, but significant gaps and delays remain in the quality of bone health care in this population. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicBone health and treatments→French-language works237,207→