Menopausal age, postmenopausal hormone therapy and incident atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Limited data exist on the association between menopause and atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to examine the relationship between menopausal age, postmenopausal hormone therapy (PHT) use and incident AF. METHODS: The Women's Health Study (WHS) enrolled 39 876 female health professionals between 1992 and 1995. We prospectively examined 30 034 women in WHS using Cox proportional-hazard models. Participants were free of cardiovascular disease and AF at baseline and had not undergone hysterectomy without bilateral oophorectomy prior to menopause. Incident AF was confirmed by medical record review. RESULTS: At baseline, median age was 53 years (IQR 49-60), median menopausal age was 50 years (IQR 46-52) and 14 415 (48.0%) had prior PHT use. Over a median follow-up of 20.5 years, 1350 AF events occurred. In multivariable analysis, relative hazards for AF were lower among women with younger age at menopause but did not differ significantly from women with the oldest menopausal age (<45: HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.02; 45-49: HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.08; 50-54: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.06; >54 years: referent). Use of oestrogen-alone PHT, but not oestrogen and progesterone, was independently associated with AF risk (HR 1.22; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.45 vs HR 1.04; 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26). This relationship was not attenuated by intermediary cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: In this large prospective study, menopausal age was not significantly related to incident AF, while use of oestrogen monotherapy was associated with increased AF risk. Our findings suggest a pathophysiological link between unopposed oestrogen exposure and AF in women. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT000000479; Post-results.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".