MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041164494 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000010133

Association of cerebrovascular reactivity and Alzheimer pathologic markers with cognitive performance

2020· article· en· W3041164494 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sandeepa Sur, Zixuan Lin, Yang Li, Sevil Yaşar, Paul B. Rosenberg, Abhay Moghekar, Xirui Hou, Rita R. Kalyani, Kaisha Hazel, George Pottanat, Cuimei Xu, Peter C.M. van Zijl, Jay J. Pillai, Peiying Liu, Marilyn Albert, Hanzhang Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentInternal medicineHyperintensityDementiaCardiologyConfidence intervalMedicineCognitionEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceVascular dementiaHypercapniaPsychologyMagnetic resonance imagingPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To determine whether MRI-based cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) can predict cognitive performance independently of Alzheimer pathologic markers, we studied the relationship between cognition, CVR, and CSF-derived β-amyloid42 (Aβ42) and tau in a group of elderly individuals with mixed Alzheimer and vascular cognitive impairment and dementia. Methods This was a cross-sectional study of 72 participants 69 ± 8 years of age consisting of individuals with normal cognition (n = 28) and cognitive impairment (n = 44) (including 36 with mild cognitive impairment [MCI] and 8 with mild dementia). CVR was measured with hypercapnia-MRI. Whole-brain CVR (percent blood oxygen level–dependent per 1 mm Hg Etco2) was used to estimate vasodilatory capacity. Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores, cognitive domains scores, and a global composite cognitive score were obtained. AD biomarkers included CSF assays of Aβ42 and tau. Results Whole-brain CVR was lower in the impaired (mean ± SE, 0.132 ± 0.006%/mm Hg) compared to the normal (0.151 ± 0.007%/mm Hg) group (β = −0.02%/mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.038 to −0.001). After adjustment for CSF Aβ42 and tau, higher whole-brain CVR was associated with better performance on the MoCA (β = 29.64, 95% CI 9.94–49.34) and with a global composite cognitive score (β = 4.32, 95% CI 0.05–8.58). When the CVR marker was compared with the Fazekas score based on white matter hyperintensities and vascular risk-score in a single regression model predicting the MoCA score, only CVR revealed a significant effect (β = 28.09, 95% CI 6.14–50.04), while the other 2 measures were not significant. Conclusions CVR was significantly associated with cognitive performance independently of AD pathology. Whole-brain CVR may be a useful biomarker for evaluating cognitive impairment related to vascular disease in older individuals. Classification of evidence This study provides Class II evidence that CVR was significantly associated with cognitive performance independent of AD pathology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations82
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207