Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 983

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

National Use of Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy: Annual Trends and Response to Recent Evidence

Hersh, Adam L., Stefanick, Marcia L., Stafford, Randall S.·2004·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Postmenopausal hormone therapy use increased dramatically during the past 2 decades because of a prevailing belief in its health benefits. Recent evidence from randomized trials published in July 2002 demonstrated adverse cardiovascular disease events and other risks with hormone therapy in the form of oral estrogen combined with progestin. OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of hormone therapy use from 1995 until July 2003, including the impact of recent evidence. DESIGN, SETTING, AND POPULATION: Two databases were used to describe national trends in hormone therapy use from January 1995 to July 2003. The National Prescription Audit database provided data on the number of hormone therapy prescriptions filled by retail pharmacies and the National Disease and Therapeutic Index database provided data on patient visits to office-based physicians during which hormone therapy was prescribed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual number of hormone therapy prescriptions and characteristics of visits to physicians during which hormone therapy was prescribed. RESULTS: Annual hormone therapy prescriptions increased from 58 million in 1995 to 90 million in 1999, representing approximately 15 million women per year, then remained stable through June 2002. Adoption of new oral estrogen/progestin combinations, primarily Prempro, accounted for most of this growth. Obstetrician/gynecologists provided more than 70% of hormone therapy prescriptions, and more than one third of patients were older than 60 years. Following the publication of trial results in July 2002, hormone therapy prescriptions declined in successive months. Relative to January-June 2002, prescriptions from January-June 2003 declined by 66% for Prempro and 33% for Premarin. Small increases were observed in vaginal formulations and in new prescriptions for low-dose Premarin. If prescription rates observed through July 2003 remain stable, a decline to 57 million prescriptions for 2003, similar to the rate in 1995, is projected. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical practice responded rapidly to recent evidence of harms associated with hormone therapy. Since July 2002, many patients have discontinued hormone therapy or are tapering to lower doses.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.291.1.47

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 983

Metadata

Authors
Hersh, A. L., Stefanick, M. L., & Stafford, R. S.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2004-01-07
Volume
291
Issue
1
Pages
47
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1983521550
Cited by
983
References
6
FWCI
56.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.