Basilar artery occlusion management: An international survey of gender influence on management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The superiority of endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) over medical management was not established in two early basilar artery occlusion (BAO) randomized controlled trials. Despite this, many clinicians recommended EVT for acute BAO under certain circumstances. This paper aims to compare physicians’ diagnostic and management strategies of BAO according to gender. Methods From January to March 2022 an international survey was conducted regarding management strategies in acute BAO. We compared responses between clinicians by identifying gender. Questions were designed to examine clinical and imaging parameters influencing management of patients with BAO. Results Among the 1245 respondents from 73 countries, 311 (25.0%) identified as female. This figure was 13.6% amongst interventionists. Geographically, female respondents were lowest in Asia (14.5%) and North America (23.9%). The proportion of respondents identifying as female was consistent regardless of their years of experience. Female respondents were more likely to choose time of onset as time of first estimated stroke like symptom (48.0% vs. 38.5%, p < .01), were less likely to favor thrombectomy in the V4 segment of vertebrobasilar artery occlusions (31.5% vs. 43.3%, p < .01), and were less likely to find it acceptable to enroll all patients who met trial criteria in the standard medical treatment arm of a clinical trial (41.2% vs. 47.0%, p = .01). Male respondents were more likely to agree that thrombolysis would not alter their decision on proceeding with EVT (93.7% vs. 88.3%, p < .01). Conclusions Female clinicians appear to be significantly underrepresented in stroke medicine. This is most pronounced amongst interventionists and in Asia. Although male and female opinions were closely aligned on many aspects of BAO management, differences in opinion were observed in a number of significant areas which influence decision making.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".