Testosterone Replacement in Men With Hypogonadism and Effects on Anemia—Blood, Sex, and Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low testosterone levels are common in middle-aged, and particularly in older, men. 1 The Massachusetts Male Aging Study (MMAS) estimated the prevalence of low testosterone levels to be 25.3% among men ages 40 to 70 years using blood-based cutoffs alone.Hypogonadism, which incorporates specific symptoms along with a low testosterone level, has a lower prevalence (6% to 12% in the MMAS).However, it is still common among men and increases with age.Common symptoms of hypogonadism include reduced libido, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, reduced muscle mass, poor concentration, and sleep disturbance.2 Anemia of aging, a mild, normocytic anemia, is also common in older adults, with a prevalence of up to 15%. 3 Although the causes of anemia of aging appear to be multifactorial and have not been fully elucidated, in 10% to 15% of men with anemia of aging there is concomitant low testosterone.Supporting this association, medical and surgical castration, commonly used to treat advanced prostate cancer, are associated with a relatively rapid (over 3 to 6 months) reduction in hemoglobin of 0.7 to 1.6 g/L. 4 Although there are no approved therapies for anemia of aging, testosterone
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".