Sex Hormones and Cognition: Neuroendocrine Influences on Memory and Learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Sex differences in neurological disease exist in incidence, severity, progression, and symptoms and may ultimately influence treatment. Cognitive disturbances are frequent in neuropsychiatric disease with men showing greater cognitive impairment in schizophrenia, but women showing more severe dementia and cognitive decline with Alzheimer's disease. Although there are no overall differences in intelligence between the sexes, men, and women demonstrate slight but consistent differences in a number of cognitive domains. These include a male advantage, on average, in some types of spatial abilities and a female advantage on some measures of verbal fluency and memory. Sex differences in traits or behaviors generally indicate the involvement of sex hormones, such as androgens and estrogens. We review the literature on whether adult levels of testosterone and estradiol influence spatial ability in both males and females from rodent models to humans. We also include information on estrogens and their ability to modulate verbal memory in men and women. Estrone and progestins are common components of hormone therapies, and we also review the existing literature concerning their effects on cognition. We also review the sex differences in the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex as they relate to cognitive performance in both rodents and humans. There has been greater recognition in the scientific literature that it is important to study both sexes and also to analyze study findings with sex as a variable. Only by examining these sex differences can we progress to finding treatments that will improve the cognitive health of both men and women. © 2016 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 6:1295‐1337, 2016.
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.
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 it