MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Endocrine Aspects of Women’s Sexual Function

2010· review· en· W2021287307 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSexual function and dysfunction studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndocrine systemSexual functionHormoneMedicineSexual dysfunctionPsychologyPhysiologyEndocrinologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Endocrine changes during aging as well as endocrine disorders may either directly or indirectly modulate female sexual function by altering sex hormones, or by impacting on vascular, neurogenic, or psychologic factors. AIM: To review information on the impact of the hormonal changes associated with aging or those caused by endocrine disorders on female sexual function and current information on the risks and benefits of hormonal treatments. METHODS: Committee members outlined topics and reviewed the published literature on endocrine aspects of female sexual function over a 2-year period. Presentation of the recommendations were presented at the International Consultation on Sexual Medicine Paris, France 2009 and revised accordingly. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality of data published in the literature and recommendations were based on the GRADES system. RESULTS: Recommendations and guidelines concerning the role of sex hormones and endocrine disorders in female sexual function were derived. CONCLUSIONS: Hormones are only one component of the many factors that contribute to normal sexual function in women. Further research is needed as to the impact of hormones and endocrine disorders on female sexual dysfunction and the benefits and risks of hormonal therapies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.286 · 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