Women and Men Presenting to a Rural and Remote Memory Clinic in Saskatchewan, Canada Show Similar Cognitive Findings for Dementia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The course of dementia may differ between men and women. Men, for example, are more likely to exhibit aggression. It is unclear if sex differences are present at initial presentation. The present study examines sex differences among patients at initial referral to a memory clinic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three hundred seventy-five (159 males, 216 females) patients referred to the University of Saskatchewan's Rural and Remote Memory Clinic participated. Data were collected from patients and caregivers at initial assessment. Cognitive, functional, and demographic information were compared between males and females. RESULTS: Males and females presented to the clinic at similar ages. Females were more likely to have a son or daughter caregiver and to live alone. Males were more likely to be currently working. No statistically significant differences were found for cognitive or functional assessment scores. DISCUSSION: Within this rural and remote sample, there was equivalence between male and female level of cognitive decline, function and neuropsychiatric symptoms at initial referral. Both sexes were of similar ages at the time of initial presentation. These findings may provide reassurance to patients and their family members as it does not appear that patients of one sex were referred later than the other.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".