Sex differences in brain atrophy in dementia with Lewy bodies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Sex influences neurodegeneration, but it has been poorly investigated in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). We investigated sex differences in brain atrophy in DLB using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: We included 436 patients from the European-DLB consortium and the Mayo Clinic. Sex differences and sex-by-age interactions were assessed through visual atrophy rating scales (n = 327; 73 ± 8 years, 62% males) and automated estimations of regional gray matter volume and cortical thickness (n = 165; 69 ± 9 years, 72% males). RESULTS: We found a higher likelihood of frontal atrophy and smaller volumes in six cortical regions in males and thinner olfactory cortices in females. There were significant sex-by-age interactions in volume (six regions) and cortical thickness (seven regions) across the entire cortex. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate that males have more widespread cortical atrophy at younger ages, but differences tend to disappear with increasing age, with males and females converging around the age of 75. HIGHLIGHTS: Male DLB patients had higher odds for frontal atrophy on radiological visual rating scales. Male DLB patients displayed a widespread pattern of cortical gray matter alterations on automated methods. Sex differences in gray matter measures in DLB tended to disappear with increasing age.
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".