MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4223614557 · doi:10.1177/17474930221090133

Sex differences in the symptom presentation of stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· review· en· W4223614557 on OpenAlexaff
Sultana Shajahan, Lingli Sun, Katie Harris, Xia Wang, Else Charlotte Sandset, Amy Yu, Mark Woodward, Sanne A. E. Peters, Cheryl Carcel

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Ischemic Stroke Management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersMedical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisPresentation (obstetrics)Stroke (engine)Systematic reviewClinical neurologyMEDLINEInternal medicineSurgeryNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Early diagnosis through symptom recognition is vital in the management of acute stroke. However, women who experience stroke are more likely than men to be initially given a nonstroke diagnosis and it is unclear if potential sex differences in presenting symptoms increase the risk of delayed or missed stroke diagnosis. AIMS: To quantify sex differences in the symptom presentation of stroke and assess whether these differences are associated with a delayed or missed diagnosis. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched up to January 2021. Studies were included if they reported presenting symptoms of adult women and men with diagnosed stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic) or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and were published in English. Mean percentages with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of each symptom were calculated for women and men. The crude relative risks (RRs) with 95% CI of symptoms being present in women, relative to men, were also calculated and pooled. Any data on the delayed or missed diagnosis of stroke for women compared to men based on symptom presentation were also extracted. RESULTS: Pooled results from 21 eligible articles showed that women and men presented with a similar mean percentage of motor deficit (56% in women vs 56% in men) and speech deficit (41% in women vs 40% in men). Despite this, women more commonly presented with nonfocal symptoms than men: generalized nonspecific weakness (49% vs 36%), mental status change (31% vs 21%), and confusion (37% vs 28%), whereas men more commonly presented with ataxia (44% vs 30%) and dysarthria (32% vs 27%). Women also had a higher risk of presenting with some nonfocal symptoms: generalized weakness (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.09-2.03), mental status change (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.22-1.71), fatigue (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.05-1.92), and loss of consciousness (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.12-1.51). In contrast, women had a lower risk of presenting with dysarthria (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82-0.95), dizziness (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.95), gait disturbance (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97), and imbalance (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.57-0.81). Only one study linking symptoms to definite stroke/TIA diagnosis found that pain and unilateral sensory loss are associated with lower odds of a definite diagnosis in women compared to men. CONCLUSION: Although women showed a higher prevalence of some nonfocal symptoms, the prevalence of focal neurological symptoms, such as motor weakness and speech deficit, was similar for both sexes. Awareness of sex differences in symptoms in acute stroke evaluation, careful consideration of the full constellation of presenting symptoms, and further studies linking symptoms to diagnostic outcomes can be helpful in improving early diagnosis and management in both sexes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations57
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementFrench-language works237,207