MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320492875 · doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuad003

Lipid profile and risk of cardiovascular disease in adult transgender men receiving cross-sex hormone therapy: a systematic review

2023· review· en· W4320492875 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fernanda Cristina de Abreu Quintela Castro, Taísa Sabrina Silva Pereira, Danúbia Boy Alves, Letícia Chiepe, Laura Sperandio Nascimento, Kelly Cristina Mota Braga Chiepe, Rafael Mazioli Barcelos, Bruno Maia Costa, Oscar Geovanny Enríquez Martínez, Joamyr Victor Rossoni, Tatiani Bellettini‐Santos

Bibliographic record

VenueNutrition Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa e Inovação do Espírito SantoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsMedicineBody mass indexHormone therapyInternal medicineEndocrinologyContext (archaeology)Sex hormone-binding globulinPopulationHormoneBiologyEnvironmental healthAndrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: A recent US national survey of the health status of the male transgender population has raised awareness about the little-studied relationship between testosterone hormone therapy in transgender men and cardiovascular outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to assess the relationship between cross-sex hormone therapy in transgender men and lipid profiles and cardiovascular risk. DATA SOURCES: The PubMed, SciELO, SpringerLink, and EBSCOhost databases were searched up to March 2021 for studies assessing the association between cross-sex hormone therapy and the incidence of outcomes related to cardiovascular disease in transgender men over 18 years of age . DATA EXTRACTION: Data extracted were sorted into clinical data (systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure), anthropometric data (body mass index, weight, waist circumference, fat mass, and lean mass), and biochemical data (triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [VLDL-C], and the HDL-C to LDL-C ratio). DATA ANALYSIS: Study quality was appraised independently by two reviewers using the Cochrane tools for assessment of methodological quality or risk of bias in nonrandomized studies, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied. Of 735 studies identified, 11 were included in the review. Most studies reported no change in cholesterol or triglyceride levels after hormone treatment. A reduction in HDL-C levels was observed in 7 of 11 studies, although this alone cannot be considered a cardiovascular risk factor. Likewise, clinical and anthropometric findings showed no changes predictive of cardiovascular risk. CONCLUSIONS: Although these findings suggest that hormone therapy may lead to a decrease in HDL-C levels and an increase in LDL-C levels, they are insufficient to establish a relationship with cardiovascular disease. Furthermore, no significant effects on metabolic and anthropometric values were found. Further studies with higher quality and longer follow-up periods are needed to establish cardiovascular risk. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD 42020212560.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.112
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNutrition ReviewsSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207