Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Cancer Society is urging women to avoid combined hormone replacement therapy (HRT) using estrogen plus progestin, except in cases where severe menopausal symptoms do not respond to other treatments, because, among other things, it increases breast cancer risk. The society is the first to take such a clear position, according to Heather Logan, director of cancer control policy for the Canadian Cancer Society. The group’s position drew immediate fire from Canada’s obstetricians and gynecologists, whose professional society countered that combined HRT remains safe when properly used. And the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC) also took the cancer society to task for adding to the “confusion and fear surrounding the use of HRT.” The cancer society’s new position is based in large measure on the landmark Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study of estrogen/progestin therapy (see News, Aug. 7, 2002, “The End of an Era? Study Reveals Harms of Hormone Replacement Therapy,” Vol. 94, No. 15, p. 1116), although “eight or nine” other studies were also taken into account, Logan said. The recommendation does not apply to women taking estrogen alone.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.010 |
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".