Physical performance and severity of menopausal symptoms in Brazilian climacteric women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The climacteric period is associated with physical and psychosocial symptoms that may adversely affect functional capacity. This study aimed to assess physical performance and the severity of climacteric symptoms in women undergoing the menopausal transition, and to analyze the relationship between symptom intensity and physical performance. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 184 women presenting climacteric symptoms, aged between 40 and 65 years, in the pre-menopause, perimenopause, and post-menopause stages. Menopausal status was determined using the Stage of Reproductive Aging Workshop, and climacteric symptoms were assessed with the Menopause Rating Scale. Physical performance was assessed using the Short Physical Performance Battery, while cognitive function was evaluated through the Montreal Cognitive Assessment instrument. Absolute and relative frequencies, means, and standard deviations were used. Group comparisons were evaluated using the Kruskal–Wallis test, and correlation between variables were assessed using the Spearman correlation test. A significance level of p < .05 and a 95 percent confidence interval were considered. Postmenopausal women exhibited lower scores in balance (p = 0,025) and sit-to-stand (p = 0,006) compared to premenopausal women. Overall, 70,1 percent of participants reported severe menopausal symptoms. There were weak but significant correlations between greater symptom intensity and worse gait speed performance (rs = 0.18; p = 0.014), as well as between somatovegetative symptoms (rs = 0.20; p = 0.007) reduced balance (rs = −0.18; p = 0.016) and gait performance (r 2= 0.20; p = 0.007). Advanced menopausal stages are associated with poorer physical performance. Symptom severity additionally impacts physical function, reinforcing the importance of preventive strategies.
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) | 0.001 | 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".