No differences in performance on test of working memory and executive functioning between healthy elderly postmenopausal women using or not using hormone therapy
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: On average, ovarian function ceases at the age of 52 years so that estrogen (E) levels are chronically low following the menopause. Numerous studies have found that hormone therapy (HT) helps to protect verbal memory, a hippocampal function. Estrogen receptors are also found in the prefrontal cortex (PFC), suggesting that estrogen may modulate executive and working memory functions, both mediated by the PFC. The possible role of progesterone (P) on executive functions and working memory is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between neuropsychological performance, age of initiation of HT, and duration of HT use. METHOD: In this cross-sectional study, the neuropsychological performance of 37 postmenopausal women (mean age, 65 years) who used either estrogen-only or sequential E + P (E-alone group)(n = 22) or E + P continuously (n = 15) was compared to that of 28 healthy postmenopausal women matched for age and education who had never used HT. It was hypothesized that the E-only users would perform better then the E + P and the never-users on neuropsychological tests of verbal memory, executive function and working memory. RESULTS: Results showed only minor between-group differences on working memory scores such that the E + P users were slowest to generate a response on the N-Back test of working memory. No group differences on tests of executive functions were found. CONCLUSION: There was no relationship between neuropsychological performance, age of initiation of HT, or duration of HT use.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it