Sex-specific lesion topographies explain outcomes after acute ischemic stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Acute ischemic stroke affects men and women differently in many ways. In particular, women are oftentimes reported to experience a higher acute stroke severity than men. Here, we derived a low-dimensional representation of anatomical stroke lesions and designed a sex-aware Bayesian hierarchical modelling framework for a large-scale, well phenotyped stroke cohort. This framework was tailored to carefully estimate possible sex differences in lesion patterns explaining acute stroke severity (NIHSS) in 1,058 patients (39% female). Anatomical regions known to subserve motor and language functions emerged as relevant regions for both men and women. Female patients, however, presented a more widespread pattern of stroke severity-relevant lesions than male patients. Furthermore, particularly lesions in the posterior circulation of the left hemisphere underlay a higher stroke severity exclusively in women. These sex-sensitive lesion pattern effects could be discovered and subsequently robustly replicated in two large independent, multisite lesion datasets. The constellation of findings has several important conceptual and clinical implications: 1) suggesting sex-specific functional cerebral asymmetries, and 2) motivating a sex-stratified approach to management of acute ischemic stroke. To go beyond sex-averaged stroke research, future studies should explicitly test whether acute therapies administered on the basis of sex-specific cutoff volumes of salvageable tissue will lead to improved outcomes in women after acute ischemic 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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".