The Association between Sex Hormones and Developmental Stuttering Disorder: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stuttering is a male-biased speech motor control disorder that lead to disruption in the rhythm of speech. The effect of sex on development of stuttering is well known; males are more susceptible to and less recovered from stuttering than female. Sex hormones have been studied as a main accused factor for this gender dependency of the disorder. The aim of this systematic review is to navigate the extent of previous research about the relationship of developmental stuttering and sex hormones. Toward these ends, a comprehensive, electronic review of past concepts regarding the relationship of stuttering with sex hormones and digit ratio as an indirect index for fetal testosterone exposure, in Scopus, Science Direct, PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane database was carried out to identify potential studies for the review. Inclusion criteria were original quantitative research, written in English, used human subjects and published from 2000 through 2020. Findings were mixed, although potential patterns were identified. There were methodological limitations such as small participant numbers, in the targeted population in this review research. The findings from this current study add to the growing body of evidence demonstrating that sex hormone have a significant association with stuttering.
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 | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".