MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116831454 · doi:10.1080/13697137.2025.2585487

International Menopause Society (IMS) recommendations and key messages on women’s midlife health and menopause

2025· article· en· W7116831454 on OpenAlexaff
Nick Panay, Anna Fenton, Haitham Hamoda, Timothy Hillard, Rakibul M. Islam, Hugo Pedder, Lorena Romero, Amanda Vincent, (IMS Publication Steering Committee) and The IMS Recommendations Writing Group

Bibliographic record

VenueClimacteric · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenopauseBlueprintKey (lock)MEDLINEAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following a rigorous systematic review of the literature, the International Menopause Society (IMS) has produced detailed new recommendations and key messages on women’s midlife health, menopause and menopause hormone therapy (MHT) to help guide healthcare professionals to optimize their support and guidance to women at this critical stage of life. The term MHT has been used to cover therapies including estrogens, progestogens, gonadomimetics and combined regimens. This guidance provides a summary of the recommendations and key messages generated from the systematic review process. The longer version, including the detailed text, key meta-analyses, references, figures and supplementary materials, will be published simultaneously online and can be accessed via the IMS website (https://www.imsociety.org/statements/ims-recommendations/). The quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations used in this guideline are based on the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) and the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II (AGREE II) approaches. The new recommendations now include levels of evidence, grades of recommendations, good practice points and key messages. The recommendations were developed by a body of 38 authors and 27 support team members derived from the IMS and other organizations. Global stakeholder surveys, targeted at both healthcare providers and consumers, were initially conducted to identify the key questions. A Publication Steering Committee (PSC) provided oversight of the process through regular meetings and ensured consistency of methodology. By the end of the process, 30 completed sections were submitted by the authors to individual lead reviewers selected from the PSC to provide peer review and finally endorsed by the PSC, IMS board and stakeholders. Overall, 342 recommendations (285 supported by research data and 57 good practice points) and 40 key messages have been formulated. These span a diverse range of health topics, including lifestyle, midlife body changes, vasomotor symptoms, genitourinary syndrome of menopause, osteoporosis, cardiometabolic health, dementia, premature ovarian insufficiency and various malignancies. A new section addresses the often-overlooked topic of sarcopenia which requires urgent attention. Current controversial topics, such as the influence of the media, the role of the pharmaceutical industry and publication ethics, are also explored. The overall aim of these recommendations and guidelines is to provide the blueprint for support and guidance to women on midlife health and menopause, given the latest available evidence. In preparing these international recommendations, experts have endeavored to consider geographical variations in medical care, prevalence of diseases/conditions, symptom severity, availability and licensing of MHT and alternatives, and country-specific attitudes of the public, medical community and health authorities towards menopause management.

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)0.113
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.298
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1130.298
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.018
Bibliometrics0.0230.015
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0110.010
Research integrity0.0140.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.012

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations19
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClimactericSame topicMenopause: Health Impacts and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207