Gender versus sex in predicting outcomes of traumatic brain injury: A cohort study utilizing large administrative databases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding the factors associated with elevated risks and adverse consequences of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is an integral part of developing preventive measures for TBI. Brain injury outcomes differ based on one’s sex (biological characteristics) and gender (social characteristics reflecting norms and relationships), however, whether it is sex or gender that drives differences in early (30-day) mortality and discharge location post-TBI event are unknown. In the absence of gender variable in existing data, we developed a method for “measuring gender” in 276,812 residents of Ontario, Canada who entered the emergency department and acute care hospitals with a TBI diagnostic code between April 1st, 2002 and March 31st, 2020. We analysed differences in diagnostic codes between the sexes to derive gender score that reflected social dimensions. Sex had a significant effect on early mortality after severe TBI with a rate ratio (95% confidence interval (CI)) of 1.54 (1.24-1.91). Gender had a more significant effect than sex on discharge location. A person expressing more female-like characteristics have lower odds of being discharged to rehabilitation versus home with odds ratio (95% CI) of 0.54 (0.32-0.88). The method we propose offers an opportunity to measure gender effect independently of sex on TBI outcomes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".