Association of Different Prescribing Patterns for Oral Corticosteroids With Fracture Preventive Care Among Older Adults in the UK and Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Identifying and mitigating modifiable gaps in fracture preventive care for people with relapsing-remitting conditions such as eczema, asthma, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who are prescribed high cumulative oral corticosteroid doses may decrease fracture-associated morbidity and mortality. Objective: To estimate the association between different oral corticosteroid prescribing patterns and appropriate fracture preventive care, including treatment with fracture preventive care medications, among older adults with high cumulative oral corticosteroid exposure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 65 195 participants with UK electronic medical record data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (January 2, 1998, to January 31, 2020) and 28 674 participants with Ontario, Canada, health administrative data from ICES (April 1, 2002, to September 30, 2020). Participants were adults 66 years or older with eczema, asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease receiving prescriptions for oral corticosteroids with cumulative prednisolone equivalent doses of 450 mg or higher within 6 months. Data were analyzed October 22, 2020, to September 6, 2022. Exposures: Participants with prescriptions crossing the 450-mg cumulative oral corticosteroid threshold in less than 90 days were classified as having high-intensity prescriptions, and participants crossing the threshold in 90 days or more as having low-intensity prescriptions. Multiple alternative exposure definitions were used in sensitivity analyses. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was prescribed fracture preventive care. A secondary outcome was major osteoporotic fracture. Individuals were followed up from the date they crossed the cumulative oral corticosteroid threshold until their outcome or the end of follow-up (up to 1 year after index date). Rates were calculated for fracture preventive care and fractures, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated from Cox proportional hazards regression models comparing high- vs low-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions. Results: In both the UK cohort of 65 195 participants (mean [IQR] age, 75 [71-81] years; 32 981 [50.6%] male) and the Ontario cohort of 28 674 participants (mean [IQR] age, 73 [69-79] years; 17 071 [59.5%] male), individuals with high-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions had substantially higher rates of fracture preventive care than individuals with low-intensity prescriptions (UK: 134 vs 57 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 2.34; 95% CI, 2.19-2.51, and Ontario: 73 vs 48 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.29-1.72). People with high- and low-intensity oral corticosteroid prescriptions had similar rates of major osteoporotic fractures (UK: crude rates, 14 vs 13 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.98-1.15 and Ontario: crude rates, 20 vs 23 per 1000 person-years; crude HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.96). Results from sensitivity analyses suggested that reaching a high cumulative oral corticosteroid dose within a shorter time, with fewer prescriptions, or with fewer or shorter gaps between prescriptions, increased fracture preventive care prescribing. Conclusions: The results of this cohort study suggest that older adults prescribed high cumulative oral corticosteroids across multiple prescriptions, or with many or long gaps between prescriptions, may be missing opportunities for fracture preventive care.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".