Sex disparities in systemic sclerosis-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of male sex as a determinant of health outcomes in systemic sclerosis-associated pulmonary arterial hypertension (SSc-PAH) is controversial. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of sex on survival in patients with SSc-PAH. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the effect of sex on age of PAH diagnosis, time from SSc diagnosis to PAH diagnosis, and SSc disease manifestations. METHODS: Sex-based disparities were evaluated in a cohort of SSc-PAH patients with a primary outcome of time from PAH diagnosis to all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were differences in age of diagnosis, disease duration, and SSc manifestations. Survival differences were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: We identified 378 SSc-PAH (58 males, 320 females) patients, with a female:male ratio of 5.5:1. Males had a shorter mean ± standard deviation time from SSc diagnosis to PAH diagnosis (1.7 ± 14 versus 5.5 ± 14.2 years); shorter PAH duration (3.5 ± 3.1 versus 4.7 ± 4.2 years), increased frequency of renal crisis (19 % versus 8 %, relative risk (RR) 2.33, 95 %CI 1.22, 4.46), interstitial lung disease (67 % versus 48 %, RR 1.41, 95 %CI 1.14, 1.74), and diffuse subtype (40 % versus 22 %, RR 1.84, 95 %CI 1.26, 2.69). Males appeared to have decreased 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year survival (83.2 %, 68.7 %, 53.2 %, 45.6 %) compared to females (85.7 %, 75.7 %, 66.4 %, 57.4 %). However, there was no difference in mortality between sexes (HR 1.43 (95 %CI 0.97, 2.13). CONCLUSIONS: Sex disparities appear to exist in the frequency of PAH, time to PAH diagnosis, PAH disease duration and SSc disease burden. However, male sex does not independently impact SSc-PAH survival.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".