Effects of estrogen replacement therapy on autonomic function of post-menopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: estrogen deficit during menopause may be related to cardiac autonomic function imbalance, reducing the cardiovagal reflex response that could potentially increase cardiovascular risk. The physiological mechanisms that lead to this alteration in postmenopausal women remain unclear. In this article, the effect of hormonal replacement therapy on autonomic function in women submitted to hysterectomy is discussed. Methods: Fifty women with a previous hysterectomy and amenorrhea for 1 year prior to surgery were enrolled in a prospective randomized crossover double-blind placebo controlled trial. Either oral estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) conjugated estrogens 0.625 mg once a day or placebo, were randomly administered in a crossover design during 12 weeks with a 2 week washout period. Cardiovagal autonomic function was assessed by conventional techniques and through venous occlusion plethysmography in order to evaluate vascular autonomic function calculating forearm blood flow (FBF) and peripheral vascular resistance (PVR) at baseline, and during head-up tilt (HUT) and a non-hypotensive stimuli (-10mmHg) lower-body negative pressure (LBNP). Results: No differences were found in cardiovagal autonomic function comparing ERT vs. placebo at baseline resting conditions, nor during HUT and LBNP. A significant difference was identified in supine FBF [1.9(0.5) vs. 1.5(0.5), p=0.02] as well as in PVR [53.5(18.2) vs. 68.6(34), p=0.02] comparing ERT vs. placebo interventions. Conclusions: Short term ERT did not improve cardiovascular autonomic reflex responses in postmenopausal women, but increased vascular relaxation primarily by reducing peripheral vascular resistance. Hormone replacement therapy can be used under adequate supervision in order to improve menopausal symptoms during a short period of time, mainly in young non-hypertensive post-menopausal women.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".