High internal consistency and efficacy of intravaginal DHEA for vaginal atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the compelling data obtained in a pivotal phase III clinical trial performed in 218 postmenopausal women suffering from vaginal atrophy who received daily intravaginal 0.25, 0.5 or 1.0% DHEA (dehydroepiandrosterone) ovules for 12 weeks, we have performed analysis of the four co-primary objectives at each site of that multicentre U.S. and Canadian trial. Comparison was made of the change in percentage of parabasal and superficial cells, vaginal pH and severity of the most bothersome symptom. The site-by-site (seven sites) analysis has shown that 10-13 women per group are generally sufficient to obtain a significant or highly statistically significant decrease in vaginal pH and percentage of parabasal cells and increased percentage of superficial cells at p values ranging from 0.02 to <0.0001. For vaginal pain as the most bothersome symptom, a statistically significant difference from baseline was found at six out of seven sites. The exceptionally high consistency between all sites in this phase III study and high potency of the compound permit to obtain a clinically and statistically significant to highly significant effect of treatment on all parameters of vaginal atrophy with the 0.5% DHEA daily intravaginal dose which does not significantly affect the serum levels of oestrogens, thus avoiding systemic risks.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".