Sex Differences in the Relationship Between Psychosocial Stress and Myocardial Tissue Characteristics: A CMR Imaging Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosocial stress is linked to the development of cardiovascular disease, with a more pronounced impact in female participants. This study investigates sex differences in the association between perceived stress and myocardial tissue characteristics, as assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging, and evaluates the contribution of psychosocial burden, including caregiving and perceived social standing. METHODS: This study included 219 participants (53.9% females; mean age, 54.4±11.0 years) without overt cardiovascular disease, drawn from a prospective repository. Participants completed the perceived stress scale and cardiovascular magnetic resonance with native T1 and T2 mappings. Psychosocial variables included family caregiving responsibilities and perceived emotional support. The study investigated associations between perceived stress scale scores, and native T1 and T2 mapping sequences and assessed sex differences and psychosocial burden. RESULTS: High-stress female participants had significantly longer T1 times than low-stress female participants in both healthy and at-risk groups and longer T2 times in the at-risk group. No significant differences were observed in male participants. Perceived stress scale scores significantly predicted T1 values in female participants (95% CI, 0.088–3.517; P =0.040) but not in male participants (94% CI, −0.687 to 2.139; P =0.310). In multivariable analysis, caregiving burden and perceived emotional support were independent predictors of T1 in female participants ( P =0.009 and P =0.035, respectively) but not in male participants. CONCLUSIONS: Psychosocial stress was associated with early subclinical myocardial changes in female participants but not in male participants, suggesting sex-specific pathways linking stress to early myocardial remodeling. These findings support the integration of psychosocial factors into cardiovascular risk assessment for female individuals.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".