Association between central blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the relationship between central blood pressure (CBP) indices and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in adults over the age of 50. A cross-sectional study conducted using a non-invasive SphygmoCor XCEL device. CBP indices and brachial blood pressure were measured in 50 inpatients and outpatients. MCI was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument and by the European Consortium Criteria (ECC). Seventy-six percent of subjects had hypertension, and 52% were diagnosed as having MCI using the ECC. No significant association was found between any of the measured blood pressure variables and global cognition. A significant relationship was observed between augmentation index (AI) and abnormal clock-drawing ( p = 0.04) and language ( p = 0.02), and between pulse pressure amplification (PPA) and language ( p = 0.03). CBP indices like AI and PPA, which are markers of vascular stiffness, are associated with poor executive function and language cognitive domain deficits.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".