Mood sensitivity to estradiol predicts depressive symptoms in the menopause transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The risk for depression markedly rises during the 5-6 years leading up to the cessation of menstruation, known as the menopause transition. Exposure to extreme estradiol levels may help explain this increase but few studies have examined individual sensitivity to estradiol in predicting perimenopausal depression. METHOD: The current study recruited 101 perimenopausal women. During Phase 1, we quantified each woman's sensitivity to changes in estradiol using 12 weekly measures of estrone-3-glucuronide (E1G), a urinary metabolite of estradiol, and concurrent depressive symptoms. The weekly cortisol awakening response was measured to examine the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in mediating mood sensitivity to estradiol. In Phase 2, depressive symptoms and major depression diagnoses were assessed monthly for 9 months. The relationship between Phase 1 E1G sensitivity and Phase 2 depressive symptoms and major depressive episodes was examined. Several baseline characteristics were examined as potential moderators of this relationship. RESULTS: The within-person correlation between weekly E1G and mood varied greatly from woman to woman, both in strength and direction. Phase 1 E1G mood sensitivity predicted the occurrence of clinically significant depressive symptoms in Phase 2 among certain subsets of women: those without a prior history of depression, reporting a low number of baseline stressful life events, and reporting fewer months since their last menstrual period. HPA axis sensitivity to estradiol fluctuation did not predict Phase 2 outcomes. CONCLUSION: Mood sensitivity to estradiol predicts risk for perimenopausal depression, particularly among women who are otherwise at low risk and among those who are early in the transition.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".