MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033590909 · doi:10.1196/annals.1297.055

Secretion of Melatonin in Healthy Elderly Subjects: A Longitudinal Study

2004· article· en· W2033590909 on OpenAlexaff
N.M.K. Ng Ying Kin, N.P.V. Nair, George J. Schwartz, Joseph Thavundayil, L Annable

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicCircadian rhythm and melatonin
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMelatoninMedicineInternal medicinePsychologyEndocrinologyNeurosciencePhysiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: We report on a 10-year longitudinal study on 24-h serum melatonin secretion (AUC) in healthy human subjects. Fifty women and 53 men (aged 42-83 yr) participated in the study initially. Of these, 18 women and 15 men were followed for 6 consecutive years. RESULTS: (a) Cross-sectional analysis (n = 103): A significant (R = -.49, P =.0001) decline in AUC melatonin with age was found in women, but not in men. (b) Longitudinal analysis (n = 33): Repeated-measure ANOVAs for women (n = 18): Time: linear F(1,17) = 5.14, P =.037. The AUC increased by about 40% over the six-year period. In men, there were no significant changes. CONCLUSION: In agreement with most cross-sectional studies, an inverse relationship was found between melatonin secretion and age. However, the longitudinal study showed an increase in melatonin secretion, indicating the presence of putative compensatory mechanisms during healthy aging. Changes in melatonin secretion were gender specific, occurring in women only.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicCircadian rhythm and melatoninFrench-language works237,207