Sex differences in baseline profiles and short-term outcomes in patients undergoing closure of patent foramen ovale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Although sex differences have been emphasized in stroke and congenital heart disease, there has been limited investigation into their role in patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure for secondary prevention of stroke. We aimed to explore differences by sex in baseline profiles, procedural characteristics, and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter PFO closure. Methods: Data of adult patients undergoing transcatheter PFO closure at the Toronto General Hospital from 1997 to 2017 was retrospectively analyzed. Baseline information included demographic characteristics, medical history, diagnostic, and procedural information, and periprocedural complications. Post-closure outcomes were captured at index hospitalization and during the first follow-up. Results: From 1031 patients in the cohort sample, 80.7 % underwent closure for cryptogenic stroke and 44.7 % (n = 461) were females. We observed significant sex-related differences in baseline characteristics; females were younger, less likely to have a history of smoking, and less likely to have several cardiovascular risk factors at baseline (p < 0.05). The median time to first follow-up was 89 days for both groups. Recurrent stroke was observed in 0.1 % and TIA observed in 0.4 % of in the 'cryptogenic stroke/TIA' group; in the 'other indications' group, 1.4 % stroke and no TIA were reported. No significant differences were present between sexes. Conclusions: There were no differences in procedural and short-term outcomes between males and females undergoing transcatheter PFO closure, but significant baseline differences in risk factors were identified. There is a critical need for long-term, systematic studies to understand sex and gender differences in the PFO population.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".