Sex-based Disparities in Brain Aging: A Focus on Parkinson's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PD is linked to faster brain aging. Sex is recognized as an important factor in PD, such that males are twice as likely as females to have the disease and have more severe symptoms and a faster progression rate. Despite previous research, there remains a significant gap in understanding the function of sex in the process of brain aging in PD patients. The T1-weighted MRI-driven brain-predicted age difference was computed in a group of 373 PD patients from the PPMI database using a robust brain-age estimation framework that was trained on 949 healthy subjects. Linear regression models were used to investigate the association between brain-PAD and clinical variables in PD, stratified by sex. All female PD patients were used in the correlational analysis while the same number of males were selected based on propensity score matching method considering age, education level, age of symptom onset, and clinical symptom severity. Despite both patient groups being matched for demographics, motor and non-motor symptoms, it was observed that males with Parkinson's disease exhibited a significantly higher mean brain age-delta than their female counterparts . In the propensity score-matched PD male group, brain-PAD was found to be associated with a decline in general cognition, a worse degree of sleep behavior disorder, reduced visuospatial acuity, and caudate atrophy. Conversely, no significant links were observed between these factors and brain-PAD in the PD female group.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".