MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939515678

Prevalence and severity of menopausal symptoms among menopausal women, Babol, Iran

2017· article· en· W2939515678 on OpenAlexaff
Sorayya Mohammadzadeh, Zeinab Hedayati, Niloufar Ahmadi, Fatemeh Bayyani, Sepideh Mashayekh‐Amiri

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsEagle Ridge Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMenopauseObstetricsGynecologyInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Understanding prevalence of various menopausal symptoms and symptom severity in Iran will enhance reproductive health care. The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence and severity of menopausal symptoms among menopausal women in Babol, Iran. Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted on the 150 healthy postmenopausal women aged between 45–65 years in Babol city (located in Northern Iran), and cluster sampling was used as a method of sampling. The questionnaires used in this study include: symptom score card for measuring the frequency and severity of menopausal symptoms and socio demographic data. Results: The mean ± SD age at natural menopause was 48.5 ± 4.1 years. The most prevalent symptoms were back pain and joint pain (48.7%), anxiety and unusual tiredness (48.0%), irritability (46.7%), muscle pains (44.0%) and hot flashes (42.7%). The average overall symptom score card in the study for menopausal symptoms was 22.1 ± 9.8. The severity of symptoms was in the range of mild to moderate in 42% of samples, and 58% of samples had moderate to severe symptoms. Conclusion: This study showed that more than half of the women had moderate to severe menopausal symptoms and an earlier mean age of menopause (48.5 y) for women in Babol, Iran.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.629
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207