Hubungan antara Tekanan Darah dengan Penurunan Fungsi Kognitif pada Kelompok Usia Produktif di Desa Bantarujeg Kabupaten Majalengka
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognition is a system that regulates the process of information in the brain that involves several aspects of memory, language, attention, visuospacual, and orientation. High blood pressure and low blood pressure in working age often cause symptoms of headache, weakness, and decreased \nattention. This study aims to determine whether there is a relationship between blood pressure with decreased cognitive function in the working age group in Bantarujeg Village Majalengka Regency. \nMethods: This type of research is analytic observational with cross sectional approach. The number of samples used were 119 respondents aged 31-50 years, 39 respondents with high blood pressure, 40 respondents with low blood pressure, 40 respondents with normal blood pressure (control group), that taken by purposive sampling technique. The data has been collected by blood pressure and MoCA-INA questionnaire, analyzed using Chi-Square test with SPSS 20.0 for windows program. \nResult: The results of statistical analysis show that there was a significant relationship between blood pressure with decreased cognitive function (p = 0,003). Working age group with high blood pressure was 4,951 times to experience decreased cognitive function compared the normal blood pressure (OR = 4,951; 95% CI 1.861 s / d 13,176). While working age group with low blood pressure at risk 1,855 times to decrease cognitive function compared the normal blood pressure (OR = 1,855; 95% CI 0,692 s / d 4,973). \nConclusions: There was a significant relationship between blood pressure and decreased cognitive function in working age group in Bantarujeg village Majalengka Regency.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".