Use of Oral Corticosteroids and Risk of Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment with oral corticosteroids is known to decrease bone density but there are few data on the attendant risk of fracture and on the reversibility of this risk after cessation of therapy. A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a general medical practice setting in the United Kingdom (using data from the General Practice Research Database [GPRD]). For each oral corticosteroid user aged 18 years or older, a control patient was selected randomly, who was matched by age, sex, and medical practice. The study comprised 244,235 oral corticosteroid users and 244,235 controls. The average age was 57.1 years in the oral corticosteroid cohort and 56.9 years in the control cohort. In both cohorts 58.6% were female. The most frequent indication for treatment was respiratory disease (40%). The relative rate of nonvertebral fracture during oral corticosteroid treatment was 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.29-1.38), that of hip fracture 1.61 (1.47-1.76), that of forearm fracture 1.09 (1.01-1.17), and that of vertebral fracture 2.60 (2.31-2.92). A dose dependence of fracture risk was observed. With a standardized daily dose of less than 2.5 mg prednisolone, hip fracture risk was 0.99 (0.82-1.20) relative to control, rising to 1.77 (1.55-2.02) at daily doses of 2.5-7.5 mg, and 2.27 (1.94-2.66) at doses of 7.5 mg or greater. For vertebral fracture, the relative rates were 1.55 (1.20-2.01), 2.59 (2.16-3.10), and 5.18 (4.25-6.31), respectively. All fracture risks declined toward baseline rapidly after cessation of oral corticosteroid treatment. These results quantify the increased fracture risk during oral corticosteroid therapy, with greater effects on the hip and spine than forearm. They also suggest a rapid offset of this increased fracture risk on cessation of therapy, which has implications for the use of preventative agents against bone loss in patients at highest risk.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".