MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792443155 · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.11.185

302 Safety of Testosterone Therapy in Octogenarians: An Increasingly Important Demographic in 2017

2018· article· en· W2792443155 on OpenAlexaff
Yonah Krakowsky, William Conners, Ethan D. Grober, Abdullah Al Fakhri, Abraham Morgentaler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Sexual Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTestosterone (patch)Prostate cancerObservational studySexual functionErectile dysfunctionRetrospective cohort studyMedical recordAnemiaPhysical therapyGerontologyInternal medicineCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We here present the first observational data of testosterone therapy (TTh) in a group of men exclusively 80 years of age and older. This demographic has been traditionally understudied due to concerns that this group of men are at higher risk of prostate cancer (PCa) and cardiovascular events. There is an increasing number of men entering their 80's in good health. As demonstrated in recent literature, aside from the amelioration of the classic symptoms of testosterone deficiency (TD), TTh may offer benefits of unique importance to the elderly including improvements in anemia, bone density and strength. A retrospective electronic chart review was performed on all patients age 80 and older treated with TTh between Jan 1 2015 to November 1 2016 at two men's health practices. Patients with incomplete medical records or who were lost to follow-up were excluded. All patients demonstrated low serum T levels demonstrated on at two occasions and symptoms of TD. At baseline and at followup patients were assessed with a physical exam, standardized labs and structured interviews covering sexual function, psychological well-being, and physical function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Sexual MedicineSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207