MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6955668755 · doi:10.58931/cdet.2024.2330

Cardiovascular Safety of Testosterone Replacement Therapy in Hypogonadal Men

2024· article· en· W6955668755 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Diabetes & Endocrinology Today · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal and reproductive studies
Canadian institutionsFraser Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTestosterone replacementErectile dysfunctionTestosterone (patch)DiseaseAdverse effectObservational studyQuality of life (healthcare)Cardiovascular health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Testosterone replacement therapy (TRT) aims to restore serum testosterone levels in men with hypogonadism. Symptoms associated with hypogonadism include reduced libido, erectile dysfunction, fatigue, depression, and loss of muscle mass and bone density. The primary purpose of TRT is to alleviate these symptoms and improve quality of life by restoring serum testosterone levels to the physiological range. The prevalence of hypogonadism in men increases with age, affecting approximately 2–5% of middle-aged and older men and up to 20% of elderly men. Despite its therapeutic benefits, the cardiovascular safety of TRT remains a topic of debate and investigation. Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among men, and any therapy that might influence cardiovascular risk requires careful evaluation. Early observational studies raised concerns about potential adverse cardiovascular outcomes associated with TRT. These findings prompted regulatory agencies to issue warnings and recommend further research. In response, more recent trials, including the TRAVERSE Study, have provided new insights into the relationship between TRT and cardiovascular health. This article aims to provide a review of recent evidence on the cardiovascular safety of TRT.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Diabetes & Endocrinology TodaySame topicHormonal and reproductive studiesFrench-language works237,207