缺血性卒中危险因素及4种卒中风险评分中的性别差异.pdfVIP

中国卒中杂志 2017年1月 第12卷 第1期 73 ·综述· 缺血性卒中危险因素及4种卒中风险 评分中的性别差异 薛洋，钟镝，李国忠 【摘要】 卒中的发生风险存在性别差异，可能与某些生理因素及男女对同一危险因素体现的卒中 作者单位 易感性不同有关。常用卒中风险评分多基于危险因素制定，但大多未纳入性别因素，可能造成其预测 150001 哈尔滨 效度出现性别偏倚。本文就缺血性卒中的危险因素及4种典型卒中风险评分[CHADS2 （Congestive heart 哈尔滨医科大学附属 第一医院神经内科 failure，Hypertension，Age≥75，Diabetes，Stroke）、CHA2DS2-VASc（Congestive heart failure，Hypertension， 通信作者 Age≥75，Diabetes，Stroke，Vascular disease，Age 65～74，Sex category）、艾森卒中风险（Essen Stroke 李国忠 Risk Score，ESRS）评分、ABCD2 （Age，Blood pressure，Clinical features，Duration，Diabetes）评分]预测效 hydlgz1962@163.com 度的性别差异予以综述。 【关键词】 缺血性卒中；危险因素；评分；性别差异；综述 【DOI】 - 10.3969/j.issn.1673 5765.2017.01.015 Gender Differences in Risk Factors and Four Risk Scores of Ischemic Stroke XUE Yang, ZHONG Di, LI Guo-Zhong. Department of Neurology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150001, China Corresponding Author:LI Guo-Zhong, E-mail:hydlgz1962@163.com 【 】 Abstract Gender differences lie in the occurrence risk of stroke, which is associated with some physiological factors, as well as different stroke susceptibilities to the same risk factor between male and female. Frequently used stroke risk scores are mostly based on risk factors, whereas gender has not been included in most scores, which might lead to gender bias of predictive validity. Therefore, this paper reviews gender di