Use of hormone therapy in Swedish women aged 80 years or older
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes and night sweats may persist for 10 to 20 years or even longer. Information about the extent to which older women use hormone therapy is limited. The aim of this study was to determine the use of hormone therapy in Swedish women aged 80 years or older. METHODS: The study is based on national register data on dispensed drug prescriptions (ie, prescribed therapy that has been provided to individuals by pharmacies) for hormone therapy and local low-dose estrogens. RESULTS: Of 310,923 Swedish women who were aged at least 80 years, 609 (0.2%) were new users of hormone therapy. A total of 2,361 women (0.8%) were current users of hormone therapy. The median duration of hormone therapy use in new users was 257 days (25th to 75th percentiles, 611-120 d). About one in six women aged 80 years or older had used local vaginal estrogen therapy for at least four 3-month periods. The drugs were mainly prescribed by gynecologists and general practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that a number of women aged 80 years or older still use hormone therapy and that most women who started a new treatment period had only one or two dispensations despite the median duration of treatment being more than half a year. Because at least some of the women aged 80 years or older who used hormone therapy probably did so owing to persistent climacteric symptoms, vasomotor symptoms and hormone therapy are still relevant issues that need to be discussed when counseling women around and after age 80.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".