Influence of hormonal contraceptives on peripheral vascular function and structure in premenopausal females: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hormonal contraceptives are one of the most widely used prescriptions for premenopausal women worldwide. Although the risk of venous and arterial cardiovascular events (e.g., deep vein thrombosis, arterial clotting) with hormonal contraceptives, specifically oral contraceptive pills, has been established, the literature on early risk indicators, such as peripheral vascular structure and function has yet to be consolidated. The purpose of this review is to summarize literature examining the impact of different hormonal contraceptives on vascular function and structure, including consideration of phasic differences within a contraceptive cycle, and to propose future directions for research. It is evident that hormonal contraceptive use appears to impact both macrovascular and microvascular endothelial function, with phasic differences in some contraceptive types dependent on progestin type, the ratio of ethinyl estradiol-to-progestin, and route of administration. However, hormonal contraceptives do not appear to impact smooth muscle function in the macrovasculature or microvasculature, arterial stiffness, or vascular structure. Underlying mechanisms for observed impacts and areas of future research are discussed. This review provides timely consolidation of research examining hormonal contraceptives and peripheral vascular function and structure and provides guidance on considerations for hormonal contraceptive use in study design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".