ReviewNeural regeneration research2022
Estrogen rapid effects: a window of opportunity for the aging brain?
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reproductive factors and brain volume in community-dwelling individuals: the Ohasama Study.Environmental health and preventive medicine · 2026Article
- Functional crosstalk between the vanilloid and endocannabinoid systems in modulating vascular tone: implications for (neuro)vascular disorder therapy.The journal of headache and pain · 2025Article
- Sex-differential cognitive performance on MCCB of youth with BD-II depression.BMC psychiatry · 2024Article
- Ferroptosis and endoplasmic reticulum stress in ischemic stroke.Neural regeneration research · 2024Review
- Breast cancer therapies reduce risk of Alzheimer's disease and promote estrogenic pathways and action in brain.iScience · 2023Article
- Among men, androgens are associated with a decrease in Alzheimer's disease risk.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Estrogen produces several beneficial effects in healthy neurological tissues and exhibits cardioprotective effects. Hormone therapy has been widely used to treat menopausal estrogen deficiency for more than 80 years. Despite high initial expectations of cardioprotective effects, there has been substantial distrust following important randomized clinical trials, such as the Women's Health Initiative. Subsequently, the timing of treatment in relation to the onset of menopause came under consideration and led to the proposal of the timing hypothesis, that early initial treatment is important, and benefits are lost as the timing since menopause becomes prolonged. Subsequent analyses of the Women's Health Initiative data, together with more recent data from randomized and observational trials, consistently show reductions in coronary heart disease and mortality in younger menopausal women. Regarding cognitive function, the timing hypothesis is consistent with observations from basic and animal studies. There is some clinical evidence to support the benefits of hormonal therapy in this context, though skepticism remains due to the paucity of clinical trials of substantial length in younger menopausal women. It is likely that the effects of estrogens on cognitive performance are due to rapid mechanisms, including mechanisms that influence Ca
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.