Sex differences in the outcomes of adults admitted to inpatient rehabilitation after stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Several differences have been reported between male and female patients with stroke in clinical and sociodemographic features, treatment, and outcomes. Potential effects in the inpatient rehabilitation population are unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the differences between male and female patients in discharge functional status, length of stay, and discharge home after inpatient rehabilitation for stroke. DESIGN: Retrospective, population-based cohort study. SETTING: Inpatient rehabilitation centers in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Male (N = 10,684) and female (N = 9459) patients discharged from acute care between September 1, 2012 and August 31, 2017, with a diagnosis of stroke and subsequently admitted to inpatient rehabilitation. EXPOSURE VARIABLE: Female sex. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discharge Functional Independence Measure (FIM) score, length of stay, and discharge home. RESULTS: Female patients had a lower functional status at discharge (mean FIM score 94.1 vs. 97.8, p < .001) and a lower proportion were discharged home (81.1% vs. 82.9%, p = .001). Female and male patients had similar rehabilitation length of stay (mean 31.8 vs. 31.7 days, p = .90). In the adjusted analyses, there was no difference in discharge functional status between male and female patients (FIM score β -.20 [95% confidence interval [CI] -0.64 to 0.25]). Female patients had a mean length of stay 2% shorter (0.98 [95% CI 0.96-0.99]) and a higher odds of discharge home (odds ratio [OR] 1.14 [95% CI 1.05-1.24]). CONCLUSIONS: There were no clinically significant sex differences in outcomes after inpatient rehabilitation for stroke. Observed sex disparities in the general stroke population may not be directly applicable to individuals undergoing inpatient rehabilitation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".