Inhaled Long-acting Anticholinergics and Urinary Tract Infection in Individuals with COPD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inhaled, long-acting anticholinergic medication (LAA), commonly used for moderate-to-severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), has been shown to decrease COPD hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and acute exacerbations but has also been associated with urinary tract infection (UTI) in a prior meta-analysis. The objective of this study was to verify if there was an association between LAA and UTI in older individuals with COPD. A population-based, real-world cohort study using health administrative data from Ontario, Canada was conducted. Incidence of UTI was compared between older people with physician-diagnosed COPD, who were new users of inhaled long-acting anticholinergics and new users of inhaled corticosteroids–a reference medication used in similar clinical settings that has no known association with UTI. Propensity score matching was used to minimize the effects of confounding. An overall association between LAA and various measures of UTI in older individuals was not found. However, in a priori defined stratified analyses, men newly initiated on LAA were 75% more likely to develop a UTI than men newly started on an inhaled corticosteroid (hazard ratio 1.75; 95% confidence interval 1.05–2.92). No significant association was seen in women. In conclusion, older men with COPD newly started on LAA are at increased risk of UTI. Men considering an inhaled LAA should be informed of this risk and, if they decide to take it, be provided with appropriate monitoring.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".