Diet and Depression during Peri- and Post-Menopause: A Scoping Review Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the proposed scoping review is to describe and summarize studies assessing the associations between diet-related variables and depression in peri- and post-menopausal women. Studies examining the associations between diet-related variables and mental health indicators in women undergoing menopausal transition or in the post-menopausal period will be systematically retrieved via Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. All articles identified through the database searches will be imported into Covidence. Following the removal of duplicates, two authors will independently perform title and abstract screening, as well as full-text assessment against eligibility criteria. Data will be extracted using tables developed for observational and experimental studies. The methodological quality of randomized trials, cohort and cross-sectional studies, and case-control studies, will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB-2) tool, the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies, and the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Case-Control studies, respectively. Data extraction tables will be used to produce two tables summarizing the main characteristics and findings of the studies included in the review. In the proposed review, we will systematically identify and summarize the currently available evidence on the association between diet-related variables and depression in peri- and post-menopausal women. To our knowledge, this is the first review focusing on this subgroup of the population. Protocol registration: osf.io/b89r6.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".