Sex Differences in Stroke Care and Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stroke is an important cause of death and disability in women as well as men. However, little is known about sex differences in stroke care and outcomes. METHODS: The Registry of the Canadian Stroke Network (RCSN) captured data on patients with stroke seen at acute care hospitals across Canada. We used data from phase 1 (July 2001 to February 2002) and phase 2 (June to December 2002) of the RCSN to compare stroke presentation, management, and 6-month outcomes in women and men using multivariable regression techniques to adjust for age and other factors. RESULTS: The study sample included 3323 patients, with 1527 women. Stroke symptoms at presentation were similar in women and men, except that women were more likely to present with headaches and were less likely to have brain stem or cerebellar symptoms. There were no sex differences in the use of neuroimaging, thrombolysis, antithrombotic therapy, or consultations. Women were less likely than men to receive care on an acute stroke unit, but this difference was no longer significant after adjustment for age and other factors. Women were more likely than men to be discharged to long-term care and had greater disability at 6 months. Mortality and quality of life at 6 months were similar in women and men. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients participating in the RCSN, there were no major sex differences in stroke presentation or management. Compared with men, women were more often institutionalized and had a slightly worse functional status at 6 months after stroke.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".