Black cohosh and St John's wort reduced climacteric and depressive symptoms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Uebelhack R, Blohmer JU, Graubaum HJ, et al. Black cohosh and St. John’s wort for climacteric complaints: a randomized trial. Obstet Gynecol 2006;107:247–55. [OpenUrl][1][PubMed][2] Q In women with climacteric complaints, does a fixed combination of black cohosh ( Cimicifuga racemosa) and St John’s wort ( Hypericum perforatum) extracts reduce symptoms? Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ★★★★★☆☆ Gynaecology ★★★★★★☆ ### ![Graphic][3]</img>Design: randomised controlled trial (RCT). ### ![Graphic][4]</img>Allocation: concealed.* ### ![Graphic][5]</img>Blinding: blinded (patients, healthcare providers, {data collectors, outcome assessors, data analysts, and data safety committee}†).* ### ![Graphic][6]</img>Follow up period: 16 weeks. ### ![Graphic][7]</img>Setting: a clinic in Berlin, Germany. ### ![Graphic][8]</img>Patients: 301 women who were 45–60 years of age (mean age 52 y) and had climacteric symptoms for ⩾3 months, a Menopause Rating Scale score ⩾0.4 on ⩾3 items, a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Total score of 15–23 points, and a score ⩾2 on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale item 1. Exclusion criteria included any treatment to alleviate climacteric symptoms in the previous 12 … [1]: {openurl}?query=rft.jtitle%253DObstetrics%2B%2526%2BGynecology%26rft.stitle%253DObstet%2BGynecol%26rft.issn%253D0029-7844%26rft.aulast%253DUebelhack%26rft.auinit1%253DR.%26rft.volume%253D107%26rft.issue%253D2%2BPt%2B1%26rft.spage%253D247%26rft.epage%253D255%26rft.atitle%253DBlack%2Bcohosh%2Band%2BSt.%2BJohn%2527s%2Bwort%2Bfor%2Bclimacteric%2Bcomplaints%253A%2Ba%2Brandomized%2Btrial.%26rft_id%253Dinfo%253Apmid%252F16449108%26rft.genre%253Darticle%26rft_val_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Ajournal%26ctx_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ver%253DZ39.88-2004%26url_ctx_fmt%253Dinfo%253Aofi%252Ffmt%253Akev%253Amtx%253Actx [2]: /lookup/external-ref?access_num=16449108&link_type=MED&atom=%2Febmed%2F11%2F5%2F148.atom [3]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif [4]: /embed/inline-graphic-2.gif [5]: /embed/inline-graphic-3.gif [6]: /embed/inline-graphic-4.gif [7]: /embed/inline-graphic-5.gif [8]: /embed/inline-graphic-6.gif
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Editorial About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Randomized trial | medium |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".