Impact of hypertension on cognitive performance in individuals with high level of education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Education is considered to provide a cognitive and neurological reserve through neuronal changes or increased efficacy of processing networks. The hypothesis of cognitive reserve asserts that older individuals with greater experiential resources exhibit better cognitive functioning and are able to tolerate higher levels of brain pathology before displaying clinical symptoms. Hypertension is linked to cognitive impairment. We evaluated the impact of hypertension on cognitive performance in hypertensive patients with high level of education. In a cross-sectional study 163 patients (61 normotensive and 102 hypertensive) with 9 or higher schooling years were comparatively evaluated. Hypertension was defined as blood pressure (BP) levels 140/90 mmHg or use of antihypertensive drugs. The mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a validated comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests that assessed 6 main cognitive domains were used to determine cognitive function. Hypertension group had higher weigh, BMI and lower education level and family income. Hypertension group performed worse either on MMSE (27.7 1.9 vs 28.3 1.7, p=0.049) or MoCA (25.2 2.6 vs 26.1 2.5, p=0.022); similar poorer performance in hypertensive group were also seen at different domains on neuropsychological evaluation. We concluded that even in those with high level of education, patients with hypertension have poorer cognitive performance compared to control pairs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".