MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100163035

Premenstrual syndrome. Evidence-based treatment in family practice.

2002· article· en· W2100163035 on OpenAlexaff
Sue Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryMEDLINEInternal medicinePsychiatryIntensive care medicineRandomized controlled trial
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the strength of evidence for treatments for premenstrual syndrome (PMS) and to derive a set of practical guidelines for managing PMS in family practice. QUALITY OF EVIDENCE: An advanced MEDLINE search was conducted from January 1990 to December 2001. The Cochrane Library and personal contacts were also used. Quality of evidence in studies ranged from level I to level III, depending on the intervention. MAIN MESSAGE: Good scientific evidence shows that calcium carbonate (1200 mg/d) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are effective treatments for PMS. The most commonly used therapies (including vitamin B6, evening primrose oil, and oral contraceptives) are based on inconclusive evidence. Other treatments for which there is inconclusive evidence include aerobic exercise, stress reduction, cognitive therapy, spironolactone, magnesium, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, various hormonal regimens, and a complex carbohydrate-rich diet. Although evidence for them is inconclusive, it is reasonable to recommend healthy lifestyle changes given their overall health benefits. Progesterone and bromocriptine, which are still widely used, are ineffective. CONCLUSION: Calcium carbonate should be recommended as first-line therapy for women with mild-to-moderate PMS. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors can be considered as first-line therapy for women with severe affective symptoms and for women with milder symptoms who have failed to respond to other therapies. Other therapies may be tried if these measures fail to provide adequate relief.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207