MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995425715 · doi:10.1080/07399330390229902

PERCEIVED EFFECTS OF TESTOSTERONE REPLACEMENT THERAPY IN PERIMENOPAUSAL AND POSTMENOPAUSAL WOMEN: AN INTERNET PILOT STUDY

2003· article· en· W1995425715 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andra Davis, Kay Gilbert, Philip Misiowiec, Bárbara Riegel

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMoodLibidoMenopauseHormone replacement therapy (female-to-male)Testosterone (patch)Physical therapyTestosterone replacementGynecologyClinical psychologyInternal medicineAndrogenHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women experience somatic, mood, energy, and libido changes during menopause. Testosterone replacement therapy is being prescribed in conjunction with estrogen replacement therapy (ERT) for these symptoms. Little is known about women's perceptions of the benefits and risks of testosterone, so an Internet survey was conducted to elicit women's perceptions of the effects on mood, energy, sexuality, and somatic symptoms. A sample of 61 women primarily from the United States and Canada participated in the survey; one woman from Germany and one from Sweden also took part in the survey. Participants reported significantly improved sexuality and improved mood and vigor, with a decline in fatigue. Of the 7 somatic complaints assessed, improvements were noted in 5 (sleep disturbances, hot flashes, night sweats, vaginal dryness, and appetite). A prospective clinical trial is needed to confirm these results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.325 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207