Sex‐Dependent Manifestations of Intracranial Aneurysms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intracranial aneurysms (IAs) are more common in women than in men; however, there is still limited knowledge on sex-dependent differences regarding aneurysm location, multiplicity, rupture risk, risk factors, and histopathology. METHODS: This cross-sectional, consecutive cohort study examined whether IAs differ in multiplicity, location, geometry, rupture risk, risk factors, and histology between sexes. RESULTS: We included 982 patients (714 women, 268 men) totaling 1484 IAs (1056 unruptured, 397 ruptured). A total of 363 patients (36.97%) had multiple IAs, the proportion of which was significantly higher in women. In women, the internal carotid artery (40.79%) was the most frequent location for IAs, whereas in men most were found along the anterior carotid artery territory (32.86%). Men were significantly more often diagnosed with ruptured aneurysms. Aneurysm geometry did not differ between sexes; however, ruptured aneurysms in men presented with a significantly larger neck diameter than unruptured ones. Regarding risk factors for aneurysm rupture, blood pressure control was more effective in women, whereas the effect of smoking status did not show clear sex-dependent differences. Histologically, wall-type classification analysis showed significantly more severe aneurysm wall types in men. CONCLUSION: IA prevalence in women is significantly higher than in men. Women more often present with multiple IAs, whereas men were more often diagnosed with ruptured IAs. Sex-specific differences in IA location were identified, whereas geometry of IAs did not differ between sexes. IAs in men showed a more severe histological wall type. Further research is needed to unravel the molecular mechanisms underlying these important sex-dependent manifestations in IAs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".