The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Controversial History of Hormone Replacement Therapy
Open accessAbstract
The history of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) started in the 1960s, with very high popularity in the 1990s. The first clinical trials on HRT and chronic postmenopausal conditions were started in the USA in the late 1990s. After the announcement of the first results of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in 2002, which showed that HRT had more detrimental than beneficial effects, HRT use dropped. The negative results of the study received wide publicity, creating panic among some users and new guidance for doctors on prescribing HRT. The clear message from the media was that HRT had more risks than benefits for all women. In the following years, a reanalysis of the WHI trial was performed, and new studies showed that the use of HRT in younger women or in early postmenopausal women had a beneficial effect on the cardiovascular system, reducing coronary disease and all-cause mortality. Notwithstanding this, the public opinion on HRT has not changed yet, leading to important negative consequences for women’s health and quality of life.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators (2002) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.288.3.321 · Cited by 15,889
Hulley, S. (1998) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.280.7.605 · Cited by 6,216
Valery (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520270033028 · Cited by 2,320
Postmenopausal Hormone Replacement Therapy: Scientific Review
Nelson, H. D., Humphrey, L. L., Nygren, P., Teutsch, S. M., & Allan, J. D. (2002) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.288.7.872 · Cited by 990
Vascular effects of early versus late postmenopausal treatment with estradiol
Hodis, H. N., Mack, W. J., Henderson, V. W., Shoupe, D., Budoff, M. J., Hwang-Levine, J., Li, Y., Feng, M., Dustin, L., Kono, N., et al. (2016) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1505241 · Cited by 779 · cited 1×
“More recent randomized trials have tested the timing hypothesis, the Early versus Late Intervention with Estradiol (ELITE) study [70] and the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study (KEEPS) [71], and have reported a protective effect of HRT in young women close to menopause.”
BackgroundFournier, A., Berrino, F., & Clavel-Chapelon, F. (2007) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x · Cited by 693
Hormone therapy for preventing cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women
Boardman, H. M., Hartley, L., Eisinga, A., Main, C., Roqué i Figuls, M., Bonfill Cosp, X., Gabriel Sanchez, R., & Knight, B. (2015) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002229.pub4 · Cited by 612
The impact of micronized progesterone on the endometrium: a systematic review
Stute, P., Neulen, J., & Wildt, L. (2016) · Climacteric · doi:10.1080/13697137.2016.1187123 · Cited by 109
Cited by
Effects of transdermal versus oral hormone replacement therapy in postmenopause: a systematic review
Goldštajn, M. Š., Mikuš, M., Ferrari, F. A., Bosco, M., Uccella, S., Noventa, M., Török, P., Terzic, S., Laganà, A. S., & Garzon, S. (2022) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-022-06647-5 · Cited by 111
Shabani, F., Montazeri, M., Abdolalipour, S., & Mirghafourvand, M. (2022) · Post Reproductive Health · doi:10.1177/20533691221140191 · Cited by 12
Briggs, P., Barber, K., Cooke, K., Hillard, T., Mansour, D., Panay, N., Pearson, K., Tanna, N., & Wokoma, T. (2022) · Post Reproductive Health · doi:10.1177/20533691221084827 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Cagnacci, A., & Venier, M.
- Venue
- Medicina
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2019-09-18
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 602
- ISSN
- 1010-660X (ISSN-L)
- 1648-9144
- OpenAlex
- W2973738822
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 21.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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.
