↓ Skip to main content

Terapia de reposição hormonal na menopausa

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Terapia de reposição hormonal na menopausa
Published in
Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism, March 2014
DOI 10.1590/0004-2730000003044
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dolores Pardini

Abstract

Although estrogen has been clinically available for more than six decades, women have been confused by different opinions regarding the risks and benefits of menopausal hormone therapy (HT), estrogen therapy (ET), and estrogen-progestin therapy (EPT). The publication of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), notably, the Heart and Estrogen/progestin Replacement Study (HERS) and Women's Health Initiative (WHI), has intensified the risk vs. benefit controversy. Millions of women are treated with HT for relief of menopausal symptoms, including vasomotor flushes and sweats, for which estrogen is uniquely and highly effective. Others may continue longer-term treatment in the hope that HT will help to prevent chronic disease. The preservation of bone mass with continuing estrogen therapy and reduction of subsequent risk of fracture is well established. Observational studies of the metabolic and vascular effects of estrogens have suggested a potential benefit in reducing the risk of vascular disease, but recently published randomized controlled trials demonstrated no evidence of benefit in women with established vascular disease or in apparently healthy women. The increased risks of breast cancer and thromboembolic disease have been confirmed in these trials, with evidence of increased risk of stroke. The absolute incidence of an adverse event is low, and the risk of stroke in an individual woman in a single year is very small, but with long-term use, the risks are cumulative over time. The risk-benefit balance needs to be individualized for each woman.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 141 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 56 39%
Student > Master 17 12%
Student > Postgraduate 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 4 3%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 35 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 3%
Other 16 11%
Unknown 37 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 09 March 2022.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#324
of 800 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,395
of 236,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Endocrinology and Metabolism
#6
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 800 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
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 236,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.