Sex Differences in Poststroke Cognitive Impairment: A Multicenter Study in 2343 Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Poststroke cognitive impairment (PSCI) occurs in about half of stroke survivors. Cumulative evidence indicates that functional outcomes of stroke are worse in women than men. Yet it is unknown whether the occurrence and characteristics of PSCI differ between men and women. METHODS: Individual patient data from 9 cohorts of patients with ischemic stroke were harmonized and pooled through the Meta-VCI-Map consortium (n=2343, 38% women). We included patients with visible symptomatic infarcts on computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging and cognitive assessment within 15 months after stroke. PSCI was defined as impairment in ≥1 cognitive domains on neuropsychological assessment. Logistic regression analyses were performed to compare men to women, adjusted for study cohort, to obtain odds ratios for PSCI and individual cognitive domains. We also explored sensitivity and specificity of cognitive screening tools for detecting PSCI, according to sex (Mini-Mental State Examination, 4 cohorts, n=1814; Montreal Cognitive Assessment, 3 cohorts, n=278). RESULTS: PSCI was found in 51% of both women and men. Men had a lower risk of impairment of attention and executive functioning (men: odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.61–0.96]), and language (men: odds ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.45–0.85]), but a higher risk of verbal memory impairment (men: odds ratio, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.17–1.75]). The sensitivity of Mini-Mental State Examination (<25) for PSCI was higher for women (0.53) than for men (0.27; P =0.02), with a lower specificity for women (0.80) than men (0.96; P =0.01). Sensitivity and specificity of Montreal Cognitive Assessment (<26.) for PSCI was comparable between women and men (0.91 versus 0.86; P =0.62 and 0.29 versus 0.28; P =0.86, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Sex was not associated with PSCI occurrence but affected domains differed between men and women. The latter may explain why sensitivity of the Mini-Mental State Examination for detecting PSCI was higher in women with a lower specificity compared with men. These sex differences need to be considered when screening for and diagnosing PSCI in clinical practice.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".