Bayesian stroke modeling details sex biases in the white matter substrates of aphasia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ischemic cerebrovascular events often lead to aphasia. Previous work provided hints that such strokes may affect women and men in distinct ways. Women tend to suffer strokes with more disabling language impairment, even if the lesion size is comparable to men. In 1401 patients, we isolate data-led representations of anatomical lesion patterns and hand-tailor a Bayesian analytical solution to carefully model the degree of sex divergence in predicting language outcomes ~3 months after stroke. We locate lesion-outcome effects in the left-dominant language network that highlight the ventral pathway as a core lesion focus across different tests of language performance. We provide detailed evidence for sex-specific brain-behavior associations in the domain-general networks associated with cortico-subcortical pathways, with unique contributions of the fornix in women and cingular fiber bundles in men. Our collective findings suggest diverging white matter substrates in how stroke causes language deficits in women and men. Clinically acknowledging such sex disparities has the potential to improve personalized treatment for stroke patients worldwide.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".