A UCL review found no significant cognitive improvement with testosterone, but the evidence remains too limited to determine an effect on menopause brain fog.
On October 30, 2026, UCL reported on a systematic review published in Reproduction and Fertility examining whether testosterone improves cognition during or after menopause.
Existing clinical guidance was not presenting testosterone as an established treatment for menopause-related memory or concentration changes. UCL says guidance from the British Menopause Society and International Menopause Society supports its use for low libido. The review therefore updates the evidence behind a growing treatment discussion rather than overturning an accepted cognitive treatment.
That distinction keeps sexual wellbeing and cognitive concerns from being treated as interchangeable. A treatment discussed for one symptom needs evidence for another symptom before the same claim can be made. Refemina’s explanation of the evidence behind testosterone for sexual symptoms provides context for that separate conversation.
The review was specifically about cognition. It should not be read as an assessment of every reason testosterone might be discussed in menopause care.
The useful distinction is between a defined research outcome and a broad promise of feeling mentally better. Claims about memory or concentration should be judged against the outcomes actually studied, not against a general description of hormonal support.
For a treatment conversation, the implication is straightforward: a confident claim of cognitive benefit is not supported by these pooled results. That conclusion concerns the proposed benefit, not the legitimacy of the symptoms prompting the question.
The trials did not include perimenopausal women, according to senior author Professor Aimee Spector. Their results therefore should not be presented as a direct answer for women in that stage. The researchers also called for future work on women’s own perceptions of changes in thinking and memory. Together, these gaps mean the review cannot establish testosterone as a treatment for an individual woman’s subjective brain fog.
The aim is not to dismiss the experience or automatically label it a hormonal problem. It is to establish what needs attention before deciding which treatment claim is relevant. For further context, Refemina discusses how clinicians assess midlife memory concerns.
Asking what evidence supports a proposed treatment for the particular difficulty keeps the conversation focused. It leaves room for a proper discussion without assuming that testosterone must either be the answer or never be discussed.
Where testosterone enters a consultation, the useful question is which symptom it is intended to address and what evidence supports that use. The evidence should also be matched to the woman’s menopause stage rather than assuming that research in one group answers questions about another. Decisions about an individual’s treatment belong with a qualified clinician.
This allows sexual wellbeing to be discussed on its own terms. A treatment conversation about desire does not need to become a promise of improvement across every part of midlife health.
That is a useful way to read treatment stories online. A woman’s account of feeling better can be meaningful without establishing that another woman should expect the same effect. The clinical question is whether research supports the claimed benefit, not whether the person reporting it is credible or sincere.
The relevance to brain fog is that it sits within a broader boundary around unsupported treatment claims. Several concerns being discussed together does not turn them into one clinical indication. Each proposed outcome needs its own evidential basis rather than borrowing support from another use.
For readers, the distinction is between how much attention a treatment receives and how well a particular use has been tested. A widely discussed treatment still needs to be assessed against the symptom being targeted. Popularity should not stand in for that assessment or settle a personal treatment decision.
That is research in progress rather than a result that can guide expectations now. Its stated aims also show why precise wording matters: cognition is an outcome in its own right, not a synonym for energy or motivation. Future reporting should make clear which outcomes were assessed and what the trial found before translating its findings into treatment claims.
This review should keep cognitive treatment claims tied to symptom-specific evidence while further research tests whether testosterone has a role in thinking and memory.
Memory and concentration are specific outcomes worth examining; Refemina translates menopause research into clear adult guidance that keeps those outcomes in focus. When health content turns brain fog into another hormone or supplement opportunity, its editorial coverage helps readers distinguish credible evidence from promotion without reducing the wider experience of midlife to a single treatment.
Follow Refemina for research-led insights on menopause, strength, metabolism, nutrition, skin, intimacy and confidence through midlife. New articles turn complex topics into clear, useful context.
Keep learning about the changes that shape energy, strength, confidence and wellbeing through midlife.
Explore Resources