↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Hormone replacement therapy for cognitive function in postmenopausal women

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
105 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Hormone replacement therapy for cognitive function in postmenopausal women
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, January 2008
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd003122.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anne Lethaby, Eva Hogervorst, Marcus Richards, Amina Yesufu, Kristine Yaffe

Abstract

As estrogens have been found in animal models to be associated with the maintenance and protection of brain structures, it is biologically plausible that maintaining high levels of estrogens in postmenopausal women by medication could be protective against cognitive decline. To investigate the effect of ERT (estrogens only) or HRT (estrogens combined with a progestagen) in comparison with placebo in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on cognitive function in postmenopausal women. The CDCIG Specialized Register was searched using the terms ORT, PORT, ERT, HRT, estrogen*, oestrogen*, progesteron* on 16 May 2002. In addition MEDLINE (1966-2002/01); EMBASE (1985-2000/11); PsycINFO (1967-2002/01) and CINAHL (1982-2001/12) were searched as the CDCIG Register does not contain all trials with healthy volunteers. All double-blind randomized controlled trials of the effect of ERT or HRT on cognitive function over a treatment period of at least two weeks in postmenopausal women. Abstracts of the references retrieved by the searches were read by two reviewers in order to discard those that were clearly not eligible for inclusion. The two reviewers studied the full text of the remaining references and independently selected studies for inclusion. Any disparity in the resulting lists was resolved by discussion with all reviewers in order to arrive at the final list of included studies. The selection criteria ensured that the blinding and randomization of the included studies was adequate. Two reviewers (EH and KY) assessed the quality of other aspects including design and assessment of outcomes. One reviewer (EH) extracted the data from the studies. In total, 15 trials involving 566 postmenopausal women were included, but 6 studies did not have adequate data for analysis. Meta-analyses showed a positive effect of 10 mg of estradiol (E2) bolus injections intramuscularly monthly in relatively young surgically menopausal women on the Paired Associate learning test immediate recall (z=2.40, p<0.05, chi-square test=1.12, p=0.29, SMD=1.02, 95% C.I.=0.19-1.85), on a test of abstract reasoning (z=10.45, p<0.0001, WMD=6.80, 95% C.I.=5.52-8.08) and a test of speed and accuracy (z=9.16, p<0.0001 WMD=6.00, 95% C.I.=4.72-7.28). However, most studies showed no evidence of an effect on verbal or visuospatial memory, mental rotations, speed or accuracy measures. There was little evidence that Premarin, the most widely prescribed estrogen for postmenopausal use, had positive effects on cognitive function. The one effect of 9 months of treatment with Premarin (and a progestagen) on a measure of complex speed of information processing (the TMT-B) was probably explained by baseline differences, as it was not reported by the authors. There was little evidence regarding the effect HRT or ERT on overall cognitive function in healthy postmenopausal women. There was an effect on some verbal memory functions (immediate recall), on a test of abstract reasoning and a test of speed and accuracy in relatively young (47 years of age) surgically menopausal women who had been given a bolus intramuscular injection of 10 mg E2 every month for 3 months. These effects were from small studies from a single research group. It remains to be determined whether factors such as an older age (> 69 years of age), type of menopause (surgical or natural) and type of treatment (E2 with or without a progestagen), mode of delivery (transdermal, oral or intramuscular), dosage and duration (> 3 months) could alter the effect on memory functions to a clinically relevant level. In addition, whether the absence or presence of menopausal symptoms can modify treatment effects should be investigated in more detail. Longitudinal RCTs currently underway in the U.S.A., U.K. and Canada will be able to test these hypotheses by the year 2010.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 132 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 16%
Researcher 19 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 13 10%
Other 11 8%
Other 30 22%
Unknown 26 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 53 40%
Psychology 14 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 34 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2021.
All research outputs
#3,298,421
of 18,738,748 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,899
of 11,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,980
of 211,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#123
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,738,748 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 26.4. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 211,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.