MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366084645 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070985

Valsartan, Losartan and Irbesartan use in the USA, UK, Canada and Denmark after the nitrosamine recalls: a descriptive cohort study

2023· article· en· W4366084645 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Efe Eworuke, Mayura Shinde, Laura Hou, Michael J. Paterson, Peter Bjødstrup Jensen, Judith C. Maro, Ashish Rai, Daniel Scarnecchia, Dinci Pennap, Daniel Woronow, Rebecca Ghosh, Stephen J. Welburn, Anton Pottegård, Robert W. Platt, Hana Lee, Marie C. Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadians Living with HIV
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaU.S. Food and Drug Administration
KeywordsIrbesartanMedicineValsartanLosartanCohortInternal medicineAngiotensin IIBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine valsartan, losartan and irbesartan usage and switching patterns in the USA, UK, Canada and Denmark before and after July 2018, when the first Angiotensin-Receptor-Blocker (ARB) (valsartan) was recalled. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: USA, Canadian administrative healthcare data, Danish National Prescription Registry and UK primary care electronic health records. PARTICIPANTS: Patients aged 18 years and older between January 2014 and December 2020. INTERVENTION: Valsartan, losartan and irbesartan. MAIN OUTCOME: Monthly percentages of individual ARB episodes, new users and switches to another ARB, ACE inhibitors (ACEI) or calcium channel blockers containing products. RESULTS: We identified 10.8, 3.2, 1.8 and 1.2 million ARB users in the USA, UK, Canada and Denmark, respectively. Overall proportions of valsartan, losartan and irbesartan use were 18.4%, 67.9% and 5.2% in the USA; 3.1%, 48.3% and 10.2% in the UK, 16.3%, 11.4% and 18.3% in Canada, 1%, 93.5% and 0.6% in Denmark. In July 2018, we observed an immediate steep decline in the proportion of valsartan use in the USA and Canada. A similar trend was observed in Denmark; however, the decline was only minimal. We observed no change in trends of ARB use in the UK. Accompanying the valsartan decline was an increase in switching to other ARBs in the USA, Canada and Denmark. There was a small increase in switching to ACEI relative to the valsartan-to-other-ARBs switch. We also observed increased switching from other affected ARBs, losartan and irbesartan, to other ARBs throughout 2019, in the USA and Canada, although the usage trends in the USA remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: The first recall notice for valsartan resulted in substantial decline in usage due to increased switching to other ARBs. Subsequent notices for losartan and irbesartan were also associated with increased switching around the time of the recall, however, overall usage trends remained unchanged.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.295
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207