Andropause: knowledge and awareness among primary care physicians in Victoria, BC, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: The causes, symptoms and treatment options for andropause have been well documented; however, not enough is known about the primary care physicians' (PCPs) knowledge in this therapeutic area. This study assesses the PCPs' awareness and knowledge of andropause in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires were developed for family physicians and general practitioners. Each questionnaire included questions in three domains: 1) General knowledge, beliefs and exposure; 2) Knowledge of diagnostic and treatment options and; 3) General demographics. RESULTS: A very high percentage of PCPs had heard of andropause (96.3%). Of the physicians who completed the survey, 92.6% agreed that men experience something similar to women's menopause when they age and 98.0% agreed that andropause is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis. Almost all PCPs (91.5%) agreed that prostate cancer is a contraindication to treatment while around one-third (33.9%) agreed that breast cancer was a contraindication. Slightly more than half of physicians (57.4%) felt that they encountered obstacles to their investigation of andropause with the most prevalent complaint being a lack of access to education resources. There is a need for improved continuing medical education (CME) programmes in the Greater Victoria region to give PCPs the skills to diagnose and manage andropause with confidence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".