Effect of hormone replacement therapy on cognitive function in women with chronic schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the cognitive effects of adjuvant hormone replacement therapy (HRT) when used to treat premenopausal women with chronic schizophrenia using an 8-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial. Method. Women of childbearing age with chronic schizophrenia were recruited and randomized into placebo and HRT groups, the latter of which was administered 0.625 mg of conjugated oestrogen with 2.5 mg of medroxyprogesterone acetate daily. Each group contained 14 subjects. The principal outcome measure was a cognitive function assessment comprised of the following; the Immediate Visual Recognition Scale, List Recall Scale, Oral Fluency Test, Trail-Making Tests A and B, and Digit Symbol Test. Psychopathology was measured using the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS) and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia. Extrapyramidal symptoms were evaluated using the Drug-Induced Extra-Pyramidal Symptoms Scale. Results. Improvements in SANS and in cognitive function as assessed using the List Recall Scale, Oral Fluency Test, and Trail-Making Test A, were significantly greater in the HRT group than in the placebo group. Conclusion. The results of this study suggest that short-term HRT is an effective adjuvant modality for improving cognitive function in women of childbearing age with chronic schizophrenia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".