MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946923322 · doi:10.1097/gme.0000000000001363

Cognitive behavior therapy for menopausal symptoms (CBT-Meno): a randomized controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2946923322 on OpenAlexaff
Sheryl M. Green, Eleanor Donegan, Benício N. Frey, Donna M. Fedorkow, Brenda L. Key, David L. Streiner, Randi E. McCabe

Bibliographic record

VenueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause Society · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialCognitive behavioral therapyPsychotherapistCognitionCognitive therapyPsychologyPhysical therapyMedicineClinical psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for menopausal symptoms (CBT-Meno) compared with a waitlist condition (no active intervention). A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 71 perimenopausal or postmenopausal women who were seeking treatment for menopausal symptoms. METHODS: Blind assessments were conducted at baseline, 12 weeks postbaseline, and 3 months post-treatment. An intention-to-treat analysis was conducted. CBT-Meno sessions included psychoeducation, and cognitive and behavioral strategies for vasomotor and depressive symptoms, anxiety, sleep difficulties, and sexual concerns. Primary outcomes were scores on the Hot Flash Related Daily Interference Scale (HFRDIS) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II). Secondary outcomes were scores assessing vasomotor and sexual concerns on the Greene Climacteric Scale (GCS-vm, GCS-sex), the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI). RESULTS: There were significantly greater improvements in CBT-Meno compared with waitlist in vasomotor symptom interference (HFRDIS; P < 0.001, ηP = 0.21) and "bothersomeness" (GCS-vm; P = 0.04, ηP = 0.06), depressive symptoms (BDI-II; P = 0.001, ηP = 0.15), sleep difficulties (PSQI; P = 0.001, ηP = 0.17), and sexual concerns (GCS-sex; P = 0.03, ηP = 0.07). These results were found even when controlling for menopausal staging and medication use. Gains were maintained at 3 months post-treatment. CONCLUSIONS: CBT-Meno was particularly effective in improving self-reported vasomotor symptoms, depressive symptoms, sleep difficulties, and sexual concerns. Although future studies will be needed to confirm the impact of CBT-Meno on anxiety symptoms, these results suggest that this protocol is effective in targeting commonly reported menopausal symptoms. : Video Summary: Supplemental Digiatl Content 1, http://links.lww.com/MENO/A416.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations86
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMenopause The Journal of The North American Menopause SocietySame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207