MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414751903 · doi:10.1055/s-0045-1811965

Reproductive History and Cardio-Metabolic Risk in the Postmenopausal Age

2025· article· en· W4414751903 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Cucinella, Anna Odone, Rossella E. Nappi

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Reproductive Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEndometriosis Research and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Hospital Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenarchePolycystic ovaryReproductive healthMenopauseChecklistNatural historyMenstruationReproductive medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Menopause represents a cardio-metabolic transition, but cardiovascular (CV) health in women is highly influenced by other reproductive milestones and conditions, which delineate a cardio-reproductive lifeline. Reproductive history represents an opportunity to identify women at elevated risk of CV events after menopause, going beyond traditional CV risk factors. This review aims to summarize the impact of reproductive milestones, gynecological conditions, and pregnancy-related factors on cardio-metabolic health at midlife. The main physio-pathological mechanisms likely implicated in linking reproductive events and CV disease risk are described, as well as the impact of specific conditions (early/late menarche and menstrual dysfunction [functional hypothalamic amenorrhea, polycystic ovary syndrome, benign gynecological conditions (endometriosis, adenomyosis, and fibroids), infertility, adverse pregnancy outcomes, and premature/early natural or surgical menopause]). Data indicate that a reproductive checklist in midlife women is warranted for primary prevention and intervention.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Reproductive MedicineSame topicEndometriosis Research and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207