Association between cigarette smoking and mortality inpatients with hip fracture: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Hip fracture is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality, especially among the elderly. Current evidence on the association between cigarette smoking and mortality in hip-fracture patients is controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on this association. METHODS: statistic. Study quality was assessed by the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and publication bias was evaluated by a funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests. Subgroup analyses were performed by study design, race/ethnicity, age ≥60 years, smoking status, and follow-up period. RESULTS: A total of six articles involving 3739 hip-fracture patients were included in the meta-analysis. Our results indicate that ever-active smoking was significantly associated with an increased risk of death in hip-fracture patients (pooled RR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.08-1.46). In further subgroup analysis, the risk of death was significantly higher in ever-active smokers than in never smokers in White participants (pooled RR=1.23; 95% CI: 1.05-1.44) and elderly aged ≥60 years (pooled RR=1.19; 95% CI: 1.01-1.40), with no significant association in Asian participants (pooled RR=1.42; 95% CI: 0.95-2.11). Current smokers had more risk of death than never smokers (pooled RR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.08-1.46). The association was significant in follow-up periods of ≤1 year (pooled hazard ratio, HR=1.34; 95% CI: 1.05-1.71), 3 years (pooled HR=1.22; 95% CI: 1.05-1.43), and 5 years (pooled HR=1.26; 95% CI: 1.08-1.46). CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette smoking is associated with an increased risk of mortality in hip-fracture patients, especially in elderly patients aged ≥60 years, current smokers, and White participants. With the extension of follow-up period, the effect on mortality of smoking is profound and lasting.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".