An epidemiologic study of the role of exogenous and endogenous estrogens in rheumatoid arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Etiologic studies of estrogens and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have shown varying results. The primary objective of this case-control study was to investigate the etiologic role of exogenous and endogenous estrogens in RA, and the secondary to determine whether association estimates for each hormonal exposure differed by time since diagnosis. Cases (n=245) were women, aged 25 to 69, residents of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), and diagnosed with RA within 10 years of ascertainment. Controls (n=244), matched on age (+/-10 years), were GTA residents attending the Toronto Western Orthopaedic Clinic for an accidental injury. Socio-demographic and health history information were collected in a self-administered questionnaire. Two series of models were examined: the first containing one main hormonal variable, and the second multiple hormonal variables. Hormonal exposures included history of OC use, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use, pregnancy, live births, breastfeeding and menstruation. Four findings emerged in the first series: (1) current OC users had a strong decreased risk (OR=0.25; 95% CI=0.09, 0.73); (2) HRT use duration and RA were negatively associated (e.g., OR=0.1; 95% CI=0.0, 0.5 for HRT use>5.2 years), (3) parous women who breastfed were at least half as likely to develop RA than non-breastfeeders, and (4) menstrual years and risk of RA were negatively associated. In the second series (adjusted for hormonal exposures and potential confounders), there were two strong negative associations with RA: menstrual years (e.g., OR=0.1, 95% CI=0.01, 0.3 for>36.9 menstrual years), and lifetime weeks of breastfeeding (test for trend chi2df=4=15.62, p
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".