Menopause hormone therapy and sarcodynapenia: the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To study the association between menopause hormone therapy (MHT) and sarcodynapenia in women from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 10,834 eligible postmenopausal women. The exposure was prior or current use of MHT (never, ever). Sarcopenia was defined as an appendicular lean mass less than 5.72 kg/m 2 using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and dynapenia as a grip strength less than 20.4 kg. Sarcodynapenia was defined as the concomitant presence of sarcopenia and dynapenia. Poisson regression analysis produced prevalence ratios (PR) for the associations between MHT use and sarcodynapenia adjusted for age at interview, education, study site, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, and body mass index. Additional analyses were conducted according to duration of MHT (5 years or less, more than 5 years), age categories (45-64 years, 65 years or older), and physical activity level as per the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly score (less active, more active). RESULTS: Menopause hormone therapy was not associated with sarcodynapenia (PR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89-1.35). When subdivided by years of use and physical activity, relative to no MHT use, MHT use for 5 years or less was associated with a higher prevalence of sarcodynapenia among less active women (PR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.11-2.21) and with a lower prevalence among those more active (PR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.92). The use of MHT for more than 5 years was not associated with sarcodynapenia. CONCLUSIONS: Menopause hormone therapy for 5 years or less is associated with a lower prevalence of sarcodynapenia among physically active women and with a higher prevalence of sarcodynapenia in those less active. Strategies to promote an active lifestyle in all postmenopausal women, including MHT users, are needed to attain benefits for musculoskeletal health.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".