MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913725587 · doi:10.5489/cuaj.5662

MY-T study: Symptom-based titration decisions when using testosterone nasal gel, Natesto®

2019· article· en· W2913725587 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lee Jc, Gerald Brock, Jack Barkin, Nathan Bryson, Matthew A. Gronski, Ross Ormsby

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Urological Association Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsHumber River Regional HospitalUniversity of TorontoSt Joseph's Health CareUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTestosterone (patch)MedicineTitrationSexual functionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: , testosterone nasal gel (TNG), is a testosterone therapy (TTh) indicated for adult male hypogonadism. This study allowed titration decisions to be based on physicians' assessment of patient symptoms. METHODS: Hypogonadal males on active topical testosterone therapy (TThE) or naive to any form of testosterone therapy (TThN) were treated with 22 mg TNG daily (11 mg twice daily) for 90 days. Titration was determined by the physician at day 90 wherein the dose was increased to 33 mg daily if symptoms were not properly managed. Total testosterone (TT) levels were collected at day 90 and 120 and the quantitative Androgen Deficiency in the Aging Male (qADAM) symptom questionnaire was administered on days 0, 30, 60, 90, and 120. RESULTS: At study endpoint, 77.0% of all patients were in the normal TT range. Mean qADAM scores increased from 30.8 at baseline to 35.5 (6.6) at day 90. Physician assessments resulted in 37% patients being up-titrated for an additional 30 days, however, qADAM scores did not change significantly at the higher dose. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients achieved the normal range of testosterone with TNG when physicians based their titration decision on an assessment of symptoms. Sexual function and energy-related symptoms were predictive of improvements resulting from treatment. These symptoms were the most relevant indicators for physicians in making decisions relating to titration.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Urological Association JournalSame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207