Sex, myelin, and clinical characteristics of Parkinson’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine if there are sex differences in myelin in Parkinson's disease, and whether these explain some of the previously-described sex differences in clinical presentation. Methods: myelin content. MWF of 20 white matter regions of interest (ROIs) were assessed. Motor symptoms were assessed using the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). Principal component analysis, logistic and multiple linear regressions, and t-tests were used to determine which white matter ROIs differed between sexes, the clinical features associated with these myelin changes, and if overall MWF and MWF laterality differed between males and females. Results: Consistent with prior reports, tremor and bradykinesia were more likely seen in females, whereas rigidity and axial symptoms were more likely seen in males in our cohort. MWF of the thalamic radiation, cingulum, cingulum hippocampus, inferior fronto-occipital fasciculi, inferior longitudinal fasciculi, and uncinate were significant in predicting sex. Overall MWF and asymmetry of MWF was greater in males. MWF differences between sexes were associated with tremor symptomatology and asymmetry of motor performance. Conclusion: Sex differences in myelin are associated with tremor and asymmetry of motor presentation. While preliminary, our results suggest that further investigation of the role of biological sex in myelin pathology and clinical presentation in Parkinson's disease is warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".