MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388706587 · doi:10.1016/j.cjco.2023.11.006

The Association Between Testosterone and Vascular Function in Reproductive-Aged Females With Chronic Kidney Disease

2023· article· en· W4388706587 on OpenAlexaff
Nabilah Gulamhusein, Sofia B. Ahmed, Jessalyn K. Holodinsky, Marrissa Buchan, Ana Gabriela Hernández-Reyes, Susan Pyakurel, Darlene Y. Sola, M Pajević, Sandra M. Dumanski

Bibliographic record

VenueCJC Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTestosterone (patch)Kidney diseaseMedicineInternal medicinePhysiologyAssociation (psychology)Renal functionDiseaseKidneyEndocrinologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in women, and women with chronic kidney disease (CKD) experience especially elevated risk. This study examined the association between testosterone and vascular function in 61 reproductive-aged females with CKD. Testosterone levels and measures of vascular function were assessed, including pulse wave velocity, aortic augmentation, flow-mediated dilation (FMD), and velocity time integral. Multivariable linear regression analyses assessed the relationship between testosterone and each measure of vascular function. No associations were observed between testosterone and vascular function outcomes, although a significant positive association between testosterone-to-estradiol ratio and FMD was demonstrated. Although testosterone levels were not independently predictive of vascular function, the level of testosterone relative to estradiol was associated with FMD and may therefore influence endothelial function in the high-risk population of reproductive-aged female patients with CKD.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCJC OpenSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207