Relationship Between 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Cognitive Function in Community-Living Older Adults: The UCSD Ambulatory Blood Pressure Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure (BP) patterns have been associated with diminished cognitive function in hypertensive and very elderly populations. The relationship between ambulatory BP patterns and cognitive function in community-living older adults is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study in which 24-hour ambulatory BP, in-clinic BP, and cognitive function measures were obtained from 319 community-living older adults. RESULTS: The mean age was 72 years, 66% were female, and 13% were African-American. We performed linear regression with performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as the primary outcome and 24-hour BP patterns as the independent variable, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and comorbidities. Greater nighttime systolic dipping (P = 0.046) and higher 24-hour diastolic BP (DBP; P = 0.015) were both significantly associated with better cognitive function, whereas 24-hour systolic BP (SBP), average real variability, and ambulatory arterial stiffness were not. CONCLUSIONS: Higher 24-hour DBP and greater nighttime systolic dipping were significantly associated with improved cognitive function. Future studies should examine whether low 24-hour DBP and lack of nighttime systolic dipping predict future cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".