MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of Preeclampsia on Long-Term Cognitive Function

2018· article· en· W2895907236 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie Dayan, Amanpreet Kaur, Malik Elharram, Amanda Rossi, Louise Pilote

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeurocognitivePreeclampsiaPregnancyCohortPopulationDigit symbol substitution testStroop effectTrail Making TestVerbal learningEclampsiaPsychomotor learningBody mass indexInternal medicinePediatricsCognitionPsychiatryNeuropsychologyPlacebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preeclampsia increases a woman's risk of stroke and leads to short-term cognitive complaints. Our objective was to assess the impact of preeclampsia on long-term cognitive performance. This is a retrospective cohort study using data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults cohort of healthy individuals (18-30 years) recruited from the general population in 3 cities in the United States, followed for 25 years (1985-2010). Psychomotor speed (Digit Symbol Substitution Test), executive function (Stroop Test), and memory (Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test) were contrasted between women with and without preeclampsia using multivariate linear regression. We included 568 parous women (193 with preeclampsia and 375 with normotensive pregnancy) without baseline neurological disease or depression matched according to delivery period. Approximately 18 years after delivery, preeclamptic women scored significantly lower on Digit Symbol Substitution Test than women with normotensive pregnancy (73.21±14.79 versus 75.87±15.22; P=0.047) and on the third trial of Stroop Test (correct answers: 38.85±3.62 versus 39.42±1.87; P=0.014; completion time: 44.02±10.48 versus 41.62±10.61 seconds; P=0.01), but there were no differences in Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. These differences were attenuated after adjustment for age, body mass index, hypertension, education, and depression. Similar differences in neurocognitive scores were noted between women with other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and normotensive pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy does not seem to be independently associated with neurocognitive impairment later in life.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207