Endogenous oestrogens are related to cognition in healthy elderly women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether levels of endogenous hormones, in particular circulating oestrogens and SHBG, are associated with cognition in healthy postmenopausal women. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PATIENTS: Four hundred and two healthy postmenopausal women aged 50-74 years between 8 and 30 years after menopause, none taking oestrogen. MEASUREMENTS: Serum concentration of oestradiol, oestrone, and sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) determined by immunoassay. Cognition assessed using the mini-mental state examination questionnaire (MMSE). RESULTS: In this group, 149 individuals had a MMSE score < 27, while only 89 individuals had a MMSE score < 26, indicating a relatively healthy population with regard to cognitive ability. Cognition decreased with age, time since menopause and blood pressure, and was better with higher age at menopause. Serum oestrogens and SHBG levels were not related to age, age at menopause, or time since menopause, and oestrogen levels were positively associated with blood pressure. After adjustment for mean arterial pressure and SHBG, the frequency of mild cognitive impairment decreased significantly with higher oestradiol and oestrone serum levels [ORs Q5 vs. Q1: 0.41 (95% CI 0.20-0.84) and 0.51 (95% CI 0.20-0.99) for oestradiol and oestrone, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Postmenopausal women with higher remaining circulating oestradiol levels appear less likely to suffer from cognitive impairment. This effect is independent of age at menopause, time since menopause and BMI. These findings support the hypothesis that endogenous oestrogens may protect against cognitive decline with ageing.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".