MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sex Differences in the Relationship Between Psychosocial Stress and Myocardial Tissue Characteristics: A CMR Imaging Study

2025· article· en· W4414978386 on OpenAlexaff
Mayssa Moukarzel, Kian Soroush, Yixing Zhang, Jean‐Philippe Gouin, Matthias G. Friedrich, Judy Luu

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Imaging · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialSubclinical infectionPsychological stressStressorStress (linguistics)Young adultMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.307 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular ImagingSame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207