Abstract TP155: Sex Differences In Outcome And Workflow Of Endovascular Treatment In Late Window Stroke Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Sex-related differences exist in many aspects of stroke and were mainly investigated in the early time window with conflicting results. However, data regarding sex disparities in late presenters are scarce. Therefore, we sought to investigate differences in outcomes between women and men treated with endovascular treatment (EVT) in the late time window. Methods: Analyses were based on the Selection Of Late-window Stroke for Thrombectomy by Imaging Collateral Extent Consortium, which was an individual-patient level analysis of seven trials and registries. Baseline characteristics, functional independence (modified Rankin Scale ≤ 2), mortality, and symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) were compared between women and men. Effect of sex on the association between age, successful reperfusion (Thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b-3) and outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression with interaction terms. Results: Among 608 patients treated with EVT, 50.5% were women. Women were older than men by median 4 years and had a lower prevalence of tandem occlusions (14.0% vs. 22.9%). In the subset of patients with available perfusion volumes (n= 195), women had smaller penumbra (median IQR:97 mL [60- 130] vs. 109 mL [73-189]; p= 0.008), and mismatch volumes, (79 mL [49-101] vs. 91 mL [57-158] ; p= 0.02). Pre and intrahospital times were similar between sexes. Outcomes did not differ between women and men, and there was no sex-by-age interaction on functional independence. However, men had higher likelihood of mortality (p interaction = 0.004) and sICH (p interaction = 0.016) with advancing age. Sex did not influence the relation between successful reperfusion and outcomes. Conclusions: In this multicenter analysis of late presenters treated with EVT, sex was not associated with clinical outcomes. However, sex influenced the association between age and safety outcomes with men experiencing worse outcomes with advancing age.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.007 | 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".