MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223990379 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2022.874724

Use of Benzodiazepines and Z-Drugs in Multiple Sclerosis

2022· article· en· W4223990379 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ruth Ann Marrie, John D. Fisk, Randy Walld, James M. Bolton, Jitender Sareen, Scott B. Patten, Alexander Singer, Lisa M. Lix, Carol Hitchon, Renée El‐Gabalawy, Alan Katz, James Marriott, Çharles N. Bernstein

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCrohn's and Colitis CanadaUniversity of CalgaryResearch ManitobaJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsMultiple sclerosisMedicinePharmacologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Use of benzodiazepines and Z-drugs (non-benzodiazepine sedative hypnotics) is controversial due to adverse health outcomes in the general population. However, little is known about their use in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). We estimated the incidence and prevalence of benzodiazepine and Z-drug use (jointly BZD) in the MS population as compared to an age-, sex- and geographically-matched population without MS, and examined the association of mood/anxiety disorders with the use of BZD over a twenty-year period. Methods: Using administrative data from Manitoba, Canada, we identified 2,985 persons with incident MS and 14,891 persons without MS matched 5:1 on sex, birth year and region. We applied validated case definitions to identify persons with any mood/anxiety disorder. Dispensations of BZD were identified. To assess the association between MS, mood/anxiety disorders and BZD use we constructed generalized linear models adjusting for age, sex, index year, socioeconomic status, urban/rural residence, physical comorbidities, and health care use. We also examined patterns of BZD use. Results: In 2016, the crude incidence of benzodiazepine use in the MS cohort was 2.10% (95%CI: 1.43-2.98%), 1.49-fold higher than in the non-MS cohort (1.41%; 95%CI: 1.18-1.67%). The crude incidence of Z-drug use in the MS cohort was 1.77% (95%CI: 1.20-2.51%), 1.78-fold higher than in the non-MS cohort (0.99%; 95%CI: 0.81-1.21%). After adjusting for covariates, among individuals without an active mood/anxiety disorder, the MS cohort had a 39% increased incidence rate of benzodiazepine use and a 72% increased incidence rate of Z-drug use as compared to the non-MS cohort. Among individuals with an active mood/anxiety disorder, the incidence of BZD use did not differ between the MS and non-MS cohorts. A higher proportion of people with MS used BZD for ≥6 months than people without MS. Conclusion: Use of BZD is more common in people with MS than in general population controls, and use of these agents is in persons with MS is often chronic.

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 score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207