Insights into Perimenopause: A Survey of Perceptions, Opinions on Treatment, and Potential Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perimenopause, the transitional phase leading up to menopause, affects millions of women worldwide, yet it remains poorly understood and under-addressed in healthcare. Despite the availability of treatment options like hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and non-hormonal alternatives, the awareness and utilization of these options vary significantly among women. Here, we conducted a cross-sectional survey with 1000 adults, both men and women, from the United States and Canada. We evaluated the perceived familiarity of participants with the timing, duration, and symptoms of perimenopause, as well as their satisfaction with their treatment options and communication with their healthcare providers. We found that, in general, women and older people were more likely to feel familiar with perimenopause, although the youngest age group surveyed also reported relatively high familiarity. We also found that there is a disconnect between people reporting high familiarity with perimenopause and its symptoms but overall middling and lower familiarity with the age and duration of onset and satisfaction with treatment options. Our results suggest further investigation into where people obtain their information concerning perimenopause, as well as into how knowledge of perimenopause may vary based on demographics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".