ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Sex-Specific Differences in Intracranial Aneurysm Rupture Presentation and Model Performance: Evidence from a Retrospective Cohort.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeExamine sex-specific differences in Intracranial Aneurysms (IA) rupture at presentation and to retrospectively benchmark sex-stratified versus pooled classification models for their ability to discriminate rupture status, using a cross-sectional cohort.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 203 patients (46 males, 157 females) with 303 IAs from a single-center, IRB-approved registry. Of these, 76 IAs were ruptured and 227 unruptured at presentation. Clinical data and lesion characteristics were summarized into patient-level variables and used to develop sex-specific logistic regression models. Adjusted Odds ratios (ORs) were produced for clinical covariates. Cross-application assessed generalizability across sexes.
resultsAmong females, 58.7% of ruptures were < 5 mm, with a median ruptured size of 4.2 mm at Anterior Communicating Artery (ACOM). Rupture likelihood in females peaked between ages 40 and 59 (aORs = 2.8 and 1.7), coinciding with perimenopause. In males, ACOM was the most frequent rupture site; although males had higher mean hemoglobin levels (14.1 vs. 12.5 g/dL, p < 0.0001), hemoglobin contributed less to rupture compared to sex-specific models incorporating age, location, and metabolic factors (hemoglobin concentration, blood glucose). Metabolic factors contributed significantly to the female-specific model, achieving strong discrimination (AUC-ROC: 0.80), while the male-specific model underperformed (AUC-ROC: 0.50), due to limited rupture events (n = 19). Cross-application of features between sexes drastically reduced performance, providing the first computational evidence that male and female rupture mechanisms represent distinct biological feature spaces requiring separate modeling architectures
conclusionWomen in this cohort more often presented with rupture IAs at smaller sizes and at midlife ages than men. These sex-specific patterns, though strictly cross-sectional and associative rather than predictive, highlight potential biological and clinical contributors to rupture presentation and may partly explain misclassification by pooled risk models. Future longitudinal, multicenter studies with balanced cohorts are required to validate these findings and to develop robust rupture-risk prediction tools that incorporate sex as a biological variable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41381934What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.