ArticleJournal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics2019
Risk of myocardial infarction associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: Impact of additional confounding control for variables collected from self-reported data.
Article in Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of myocardial infarction associated with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: Impact of additional confounding control for variables collected from self-reported data.Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics · 2019Article
- Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the risk of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a case-control study.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
WHAT IS KNOWN AND
objectiveImportant risk factors and over-the-counter (OTC) dispensing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are often not routinely recorded in electronic health records. This study aimed to assess the impact of patient's reports on these factors on the risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) for NSAID use.
methodsA nested case-control study was conducted among adults in the Utrecht Cardiovascular Pharmacogenetics study. Cases were patients with a first diagnosis of AMI as a hospital discharge diagnosis and controls were those without AMI. NSAID exposure was either current use of selective COX-2 inhibitors or conventional NSAIDs. Information was collected from The Dutch PHARMO Database Network (pharmacy records of drug dispensing linked to hospitalization records) and the patient's questionnaire (lifestyle factors, body mass index and history of cardiovascular diseases). Unconditional logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and to control for confounding factors.
resultsWe identified 970 AMI cases and 2974 controls. Among cases, 11 (1.1%) and 185 (19.1%) were exposed to selective COX-2 inhibitors and conventional NSAIDs, respectively. Compared to non-use, none of these drug classes were associated with an increased risk of AMI (adjusted OR 1.07, 95% CI: 0.52-2.18 and 0.93, 95% CI: 0.77-1.12, respectively). Additional adjustment for potential confounders from patient's reports did not change the risk estimates (adjusted OR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.53-2.22 and 0.89, 95% CI: 0.73-1.09, respectively). WHAT IS NEW AND
conclusionAdditional confounding control for variables from self-reported data or considering self-reported OTC NSAID use did not change the risk estimates for the association between NSAIDs and AMI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.