‘Under pressure’: is there a link between orthostatic hypotension and cognitive impairment in α-synucleinopathies?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson's disease, dementia with Lewy bodies and multiple system atrophy are characterised by abnormal neuroglial α-synuclein accumulation. These α-synucleinopathies have in common parkinsonism and non-motor features including orthostatic hypotension (OH) and cognitive impairment. However, the nature of the relationship between OH and cognitive impairment is unclear. We therefore systematically reviewed the literature for evidence of an association between OH and cognitive impairment in α-synucleinopathies and discuss possible mechanisms and implications of this relationship. Abstracts from 313 original research articles were surveyed, and a total of 132 articles were considered for this review. Articles were stratified as: 'direct-evidence studies' based on the direct assessment for a relationship between OH and cognitive impairment in α-synucleinopathies, and 'indirect-evidence studies' based on an association being referred to as a secondary outcome. Ten 'direct-evidence papers' were identified, seven of which reported a positive association between OH and cognitive impairment, while seven of 12 'indirect-evidence papers' similarly did as well. The papers that reported no association between OH and cognitive impairment used less sensitive measures of cognition. A relationship between OH and cognitive impairment in patients with α-synucleinopathies exists, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Three hypotheses are proposed: (1) OH and cognitive impairment occur concurrently due to diffuse brain and peripheral deposition of α-synuclein, (2) OH-mediated cerebral hypoperfusion impairs cognition and (3) the two act synergistically to accelerate cognitive decline. Longitudinal neuroimaging studies and clinical trials may help clarify the nature of this relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".