Action of hormonal therapy in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal disease characterized by muscle weakness, atrophy, fasciculations, and decreased reflexes due to upper and lower motor neurons death. It can be present in both sexes (55-65 years), but with predominance in males. However, in female patients, ALS presents its first symptoms when they are already postmenopausal, when then the incidence ratio of the disease is practically equal between the sexes, which leads to a probable involvement of sex hormones in the development and protection against ALS. The aim of this systematic review, which used the PRISMA consensus and NOS (New Castle-Ottawa Scale) score, was to evaluate the evidence of the action of hormone therapy in women with ALS. The Medline and Cochrane databases were accessed from March 2019 to June 2019, and only full-text articles in Spanish, English, and Portuguese were included. Only four articles matched our inclusion criteria. Postmenopausal women who used exogenous estrogen did not have the same protective factor as women still under the action of endogenous estrogen in the same age group. There was also no increase in the survival of these women.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".