Pilot Evaluation of Flaxseed for the Management of Hot Flashes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate, in a phase 2 pilot study, tolerability and the effect of 6 weeks of flaxseed therapy on hot flash scores in women not wishing to receive estrogen therapy. Eligibility included 14 hot flashes per week for at least 1 month. In the baseline week, participants took no study medication and documented the characteristics of their hot flashes. Thereafter, crushed flaxseed was administered at 40 g daily. Participants provided weekly toxicity reports and health-related quality of life information. The primary end point was a change in hot flash score prospectively reported in a daily hot flash diary. Thirty women were enrolled between June 17 and November 8, 2005. The mean decrease in hot flash scores after flaxseed therapy was 57% (median decrease 62%). The mean reduction in daily hot flash frequency was 50% (median reduction 50%), from 7.3 hot flashes to 3.6. Fourteen of the 28 participants (50%) experienced mild or moderate abdominal distention. Eight participants (29%) experienced mild diarrhea, one experienced flatulence, and six (21%) withdrew because of toxicities. This study suggests that dietary therapy decreases hot flash activity in women not taking estrogen therapy. This reduction is greater than what would be expected with placebo.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".