From cardiovascular protection to cardiovascular risk: the metamorphosis of menopausal hormone therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last 70years, oestrogen therapy for the management of menopausal symptoms has undergone a metamorphosis from perceived cardiovascular protection to perceived cardiovascular risk. The former perception is based on the convincing evidence from the Nurses' Health Study cohorts and the epidemiological data surrounding early menopause. The latter, and later, perception is based on the disquieting results from two randomised controlled studies, the Heart and Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) and the Women's Health Initiative study (WHI). The reality is probably more nuanced than the conclusions presented by any of these studies. When face to face with a patient, the clinician must negotiate the appropriate decision pathway around the interaction between cardiovascular risk, cardiovascular disease, menopause, and oestrogen +/-progestogen-containing hormone therapy.
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 | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".