Bibliographic record
Abstract
The world of menopause is undergoing a renaissance. In recent years, medical experts have taken to social media, igniting a long overdue surge of information on the subject that helps debunk the fear of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), which stems from the 2002 Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study.1 The devastating consequences on health and wellness were profound: an entire generation of women was suddenly deprived of symptom relief and quality of life (QOL) due to the marked decline in hormone prescriptions in North America. These effects continue to echo today. The near extinction of medical education on mature women’s health and wellness in our academic institutions since 2002 has left healthcare professionals ill-equipped to guide the next generation of menopausal women who seek contemporary medical advice and refuse to “live their mothers’ menopause.” The creation of the Menopause Foundation of Canada in 2022, recent sold-out menopause conferences, and renewed interest from pharmaceutical companies is convincing evidence that menopause is finally receiving the recognition and attention it deserves.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".