The risk of delirium and falls or fractures with the use of overactive bladder anticholinergic medications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if OAB anticholinergics have an increased risk of delirium or falls/fractures relative to OAB beta-3 agonist medications. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cohort study using linked administrative data from the universal healthcare system of Ontario, Canada. Participants were all residents >66 years of age who newly initiated an OAB medication between January 2016 and March 2020. Coprimary outcomes were evidence of a hospital visit with delirium, or for a fall/fracture. We used matching weights to make the three exposure groups (beta-3 agonist, oxybutynin, or newer OAB anticholinergics) comparable across 82 baseline characteristics. We examined both the risk during the first 30 days (logistic regression) and the risk during continuous usage (proportional hazards). RESULTS: We identified 103 024 older adults who started OAB medications. With matching weights, all measured variables were similar. The 30-day incidence of delirium was 0.31%, and fall/fracture was 1.07%; there was no significantly increased risk of either delirium (oxybutynin users OR 1.28 [95% CI 0.84-1.96], newer OAB anticholinergic users OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.58-1.46]) or falls/fractures (oxybutynin users OR 1.19 [95% CI 0.95-1.49], newer OAB anticholinergic users OR 1.14 [95% CI 0.91-1.43]) compared to beta-3 agonist users. With continuous usage, there was an increased HR of delirium among users of newer anticholinergics (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26) and an increased HR for fall/fracture among oxybutynin users (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.24). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to beta-3 agonists, the continuous use of oxybutynin is associated with a significantly increased risk of fall/fracture, and newer OAB anticholinergics are associated with a significantly increased risk of delirium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".