The effect and safety of postmenopausal hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators on kidney outcomes in women: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of menopause in women with or at risk of chronic kidney disease is increasing globally. Although international guidelines on menopause recommend the use of postmenopausal hormone therapy with or without selective estrogen receptor modulators for control of vasomotor symptoms, the effects of these treatments on kidney function and albuminuria are unclear. Furthermore, women with chronic kidney disease are at significantly increased risk of venous thromboembolism and malignancy, well-documented adverse effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy. Our study aims to establish the effect of these treatments on kidney function and albuminuria in women, as well as determine the safety of these treatments in the chronic kidney disease population. METHODS: We will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis addressing the effect and safety of postmenopausal hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators on kidney outcomes in women. We plan to search for published (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), tables of contents of relevant journals) and unpublished (ongoing studies, conference proceedings) studies in all languages examining the effect of postmenopausal hormone therapy, including selective estrogen receptor modulators, on kidney function and albuminuria, as well as the risk of adverse outcomes of these treatments in women with chronic kidney disease. Two independent investigators will screen identified abstracts and select studies that examine the effect of postmenopausal hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators on kidney outcomes in the general population or adverse outcomes in the chronic kidney disease population. Data on study population, intervention, outcomes, as well as study quality and risk of bias will be independently extracted from each eligible study. Along with descriptive presentation of data, outcome measures will be presented as meta-analyses using a random effects model. Planned subgroup analyses will be completed, and meta-regression will be performed if significant heterogeneity is noted. DISCUSSION: By examining the effects of postmenopausal hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators on kidney function and albuminuria, the results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will inform management of postmenopausal women in the general population. Furthermore, it will evaluate the safety, including the risks of known adverse outcomes of postmenopausal hormone therapy and selective estrogen receptor modulators, in the already vulnerable chronic kidney disease population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42016050651.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Protocol About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Systematic review | high |
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".