Case-control studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study A-PPI-08 in-depth review

PPIs and hip fracture (UK)

Long-term proton pump inhibitor therapy and risk of hip fracture.

Overview

Yang YX et al.. JAMA 2006 · PMID 17190895 · DOI 10.1001/jama.296.24.2947

Use for more than a year was associated with 44% higher odds of hip fracture.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Hip fracture association.

How was the study done?

Nested case-control in UK GP records.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

148,942 people.

What was actually found?

Higher odds with longer, higher-dose use.

How large was the observed effect?

AOR 1.44; 2.65.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Possible bone risk with long-term use.

What are the study's limitations?

Confounding by frailty.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Partly supports.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

UK data.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Causation.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Yang YX, Lewis JD, Epstein S, Metz DC
Journal
JAMA
Year
2006
Identifier
PMID 17190895 DOI 10.1001/jama.296.24.2947
Verification
verified – PubMed E-utilities efetch, 2026-10-25
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

not stated in abstract; grants: NIDDK NIH HHS

2. Research question

Association between PPI therapy and hip fracture

3. Study design and population

Study design
Case-control study – Nested case-control study, UK General Practice Research Database
Population

Patients >50 years using PPIs or no acid suppression

Country

UK

Period

1987–2003

Sample size

13,556 cases; 135,386 controls

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Incident hip fracture cases; controls by incidence density sampling matched on sex, index date, birth year, follow-up

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

PPI therapy >1 year; dose; duration

Comparator

Non-users of acid suppression

Endpoints

Incident hip fracture

Statistical methods

Conditional logistic regression (AOR)

5. Actual results

Results

AOR >1 year PPI 1.44 (1.30–1.59); long-term high dose AOR 2.65 (1.80–3.90); duration gradient 1 yr 1.22, 2 yrs 1.41, 3 yrs 1.54, 4 yrs 1.59.

Absolute risks

not reported in abstract

Authors' conclusion

Long-term PPI therapy, particularly at high doses, is associated with increased risk of hip fracture.

6. Strengths

  • Large population-based dataset
  • Duration and dose gradients
  • H2RA comparison analysis

7. Weaknesses

  • Observational
  • Confounding by frailty, comorbidity and falls risk
  • Prescription ≠ intake

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Residual confounding by frailty is the main concern.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

Dose-duration gradient strengthens but does not prove causality.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

C-PPI-05.

11. Independent contrary findings

COMPASS RCT: no significant fracture difference over 3 years.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

High: European (Swedish, UK, Dutch, German) data show similar associations; PPIs are widely used in Germany.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Robust association with gradient; causality uncertain.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultshigh
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidencemixed
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)partly correct but over-interpreted

14. Open questions

Effect after >5 years?

15. Linked fact checks

Use by the Tayebat archive

Note: according to the archive, the studies were compiled by the archive operators. Whether Dr. Elawady himself cited this study is not established.

What the archive says about the study

UK GPRD nested case-control: PPI use over 1 year raises hip fracture risk 44%; long-term high-dose raises it 2.65-fold.

A. What was actually studied?

Association of PPI exposure with hip fracture.

B. What did the authors find?

AOR 1.44 (>1 year), 2.65 (long-term high dose).

C. What conclusions do the authors themselves draw?

Associated with increased risk.

D. What does the archive derive from it?

Presented as causal ('raises').

E. Is this derivation scientifically justified?

Partly: numbers correct; causal wording not justified by case-control design.

Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)
partly correct but over-interpreted