MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W9496435

Reproductive hormone sensitivity and risk for depression across the female life cycle: a continuum of vulnerability?

2008· article· en· W9496435 on OpenAlexaff
Cláudio N. Soares, Brook Zitek

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMenstrual Health and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepression (economics)HormoneMoodPsychologyEstrogenEndocrinologyMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatryPhysiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout most of their lives, women are at greater risk for depression than men. Hormones and neurotransmitters share common pathways and receptor sites in areas of the brain linked to mood, particularly through the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. It has been hypothesized that women presenting with episodes of depression associated with reproductive events (i.e., premenstrual, postpartum, menopausal transition) may be particularly prone to experiencing depression, in part because of a heightened sensitivity to intense hormonal fluctuations. The menopausal transition, for example, appears to represent a window during which some women might be more vulnerable to the development of first onset or recurrent depressive symptoms and major depressive episodes. In this review, we examine the association between hormone changes and increased risk of developing depression. Some of the underlying mechanisms that may contribute to such an increased risk are discussed critically, with a special emphasis on the events occurring during the menopausal transition. Last, we explore some of the clinical and therapeutic implications of hormone-modulated depression in women.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 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

Citations298
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMenstrual Health and DisordersFrench-language works237,207