MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417493064 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-32534-5

Multivariate data analysis of sex differences in emotional and cognitive evaluations over 1 year after stroke

2025· article· en· W4417493064 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Suhrit Duttagupta, Thomas Tourdias, Sharmila Sagnier, Mathilde Poli, Sabrina Debruxelles, Pauline Renou, Stéphane Olindo, Igor Sibon, Sylvie Berthoz

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsApathyMoodDepression (economics)CognitionAnxietyStroke (engine)Multivariate analysisMultivariate statisticsCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Post-stroke disabilities in cognition and mood lead to worse stroke recovery trajectory but are frequently overlooked. Although neurological factors and clinical history have been documented as important predictors of these invisible handicaps, the role of sex has not been given enough scrutiny. Examining sex-based differences in these outcomes could help deliver better post-stroke care. The goal of this study was to explore the interplay over one year between post-stroke cognitive and socio-affective assessments for men and women separately. Clinical evaluations of a monocentric hospital-based cohort including 263 patients with first-ever ischemic stroke were taken before hospital discharge and at 3- and 12-months post-stroke. Univariate comparisons between men and women were conducted, followed by multivariate analyses controlling for stroke severity, age, and education. Partial correlations between neuroradiological (stroke volume, white matter hyperintensities), cognitive (Montreal Cognitive Assessment test), mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale; Apathy Inventory), and quality-of-life (Life Satisfaction Questionnaire-9) metrics were computed for both sexes. In multivariate analyses, women showed higher levels of baseline depression (p adj < 0.05) and apathy Initiate (p adj < 0.05) and Interest (p adj < 0.001) subscores, as well as of anxiety at both follow-ups (p adj < 0.05); they also endorsed lower scores in various quality-of-life sub-domains across all time points. Men had increasing levels of depression over time and showed stronger associations between psychological outcomes, including greater intercorrelations between cognitive assessments. Only spurious associations were found between clinical and neuroradiological characteristics for both sexes. Independently from stroke severity, age, and education, there were notable sex differences in the interplay between post-stroke cognitive and socio-affective functioning, suggesting differences in resilience and resistance to pathological burden. The inclusion of sex- and gender-specific factors in clinical evaluations seems critical to optimize post-stroke care strategies. Clinical Trial Registration : Trial name: Brain Before Stroke; ID: PHRC-12-152; URL: https://scanr.enseignementsup-recherche.gouv.fr/project/PHRC-12-152 .

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→