Blood pressure at age 60–65 versus age 70–75 and vascular dementia: a population based observational study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vascular dementia (VaD) is the second most common form of dementia. However, there were mixed evidences about the association between blood pressure (BP) and risk of VaD in midlife and late life and limited evidence on the association between pulse pressure and VaD. METHODS: This is a population-based observational study. 265,897 individuals with at least one BP measurement between the ages of 60 to 65 years and 211,116 individuals with at least one BP measurement between the ages of 70 to 75 years were extracted from The Health Improvement Network in United Kingdom. Blood pressures were categorized into four groups: normal, prehypertension, stage 1 hypertension, and stage 2 hypertension. Cases of VaD were identified from the recorded clinical diagnoses. Multivariable survival analysis was used to adjust other confounders and competing risk of death. All the analysis were stratified based on antihypertensive drug use status. Multiple imputation was used to fill in missing values. RESULTS: After accounting for the competing risk of death and adjustment for potential confounders, there was an association between higher BP levels in the age 60-65 cohort with the risk of developing VaD (hazard ratio [HR] 1.53 (95% confidence interval: 1.04, 2.25) for prehypertension, 1.90 (1.30, 2.78) for stage 1 hypertension, and 2.19 (1.48, 3.26) for stage 2 hypertension) in the untreated group. There was no statistically significant association between BP levels and VaD in the treated group in the age 60-65 cohort and age 70-75 cohort. Analysis on Pulse Pressure (PP) stratified by blood pressure level showed that PP was not independently associated with VaD. CONCLUSION: High BP between the ages of 60 to 65 years is a significant risk for VaD in late midlife. Greater efforts should be placed on early diagnosis of hypertension and tight control of BP for hypertensive patients for the prevention of VaD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".