The association between resting‐state functional magnetic resonance imaging and aortic pulse‐wave velocity in healthy adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) is frequently used to study brain function; but, it is unclear whether BOLD-signal fluctuation amplitude and functional connectivity are associated with vascular factors, and how vascular-health factors are reflected in rs-fMRI metrics in the healthy population. As arterial stiffening is a known age-related cardiovascular risk factor, we investigated the associations between aortic stiffening (as measured using pulse-wave velocity [PWV]) and rs-fMRI metrics. We used cardiac MRI to measure aortic PWV (an established indicator of whole-body vascular stiffness), as well as dual-echo pseudo-continuous arterial-spin labeling to measure BOLD and CBF dynamics simultaneously in a group of generally healthy adults. We found that: (1) higher aortic PWV is associated with lower variance in the resting-state BOLD signal; (2) higher PWV is also associated with lower BOLD-based resting-state functional connectivity; (3) regions showing lower connectivity do not fully overlap with those showing lower BOLD variance with higher PWV; (4) CBF signal variance is a significant mediator of the above findings, only when averaged across regions-of-interest. Furthermore, we found no significant association between BOLD signal variance and systolic blood pressure, which is also a known predictor of vascular stiffness. Age-related vascular stiffness, as measured by PWV, provides a unique scenario to demonstrate the extent of vascular bias in rs-fMRI signal fluctuations and functional connectivity. These findings suggest that a substantial portion of age-related rs-fMRI differences may be driven by vascular effects rather than directly by brain function.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".