Royal jelly for genitourinary syndrome of menopause: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Genitourinary syndrome of menopause is a progressive condition characterized by a decrease in estrogen, which causes bothersome genital symptoms. The purpose of the study was to determine the effect of royal jelly on the genitourinary syndrome of menopause. Materials and methods A randomized controlled trial was carried out from November 2018 to June 2019 in Bandar Abbas, Iran. The trial was registered in the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (1RCT20181107041585N1) with the main objective of determining if royal jelly could reduce the genitourinary syndrome of menopausal women. Eligible women were randomly assigned to receive either daily 1g of oral royal jelly or placebo for 8 weeks. The urogenital subscale of the Menopausal Rating Scale was used to determine genitourinary syndrome. Independent samplest-test was used for inter-group comparisons and paired samplest-test for pre-and post-treatment comparisons. Results There were no differences in the severity of sexual problems, bladder complications, or vaginal dryness between groups before intervention. Although the intervention group's bladder complications improved slightly after eight weeks of royal jelly treatment compared to the control group (p = 0.04), there were no significant changes in vaginal dryness, sexual problems, or total urogenital score. The within-group changes (before and after treatment) also showed no differences in urogenital symptoms. Conclusions A daily dose of 1g royal jelly taken orally for 8 weeks did not alleviate menopausal genitourinary syndrome. No serious side effects were observed. To make more reliable decisions about the use and safety of royal jelly in the future, different doses of royal jelly and longer trials are required.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".