MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110206791 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/ehaa946.2794

When to expect cognitive disorders in hypertension

2020· article· en· W3110206791 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatyana Khomazyuk, Viktoria Krotova

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Systems and Public Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlood pressureInternal medicineOverweightBody mass indexMontreal Cognitive AssessmentWaistObesityRisk factorNeuropsychologyCardiologyDiseaseCognitionPhysical therapyDementiaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In large-scale clinical studies, age, arterial hypertension (AH), multi-focal atherosclerosis, and cognitive disorders (CD) are interrelated, affecting the level of disability, quality of life, and social adaptation of patients with cardiovascular diseases. Aim of the study To determine the prognostic criteria for cognitive disorders in patients with hypertension. Methods To achieve the aim of the study, the examinations were performed in 182 outpatients with AH II stage, 34–68 years, in 164 of them were CD according to neuropsychological tests of MMSE and MoCA, mostly of mild and moderate degree. The relationship between clinical data, cognitive function characteristics and daily monitoring data of hypertension were evaluated. The data obtained were analyzed using medical methods statistics. Results Among factors such as age (>60 years), gender (male / female), disease duration (>10 years), waist circumference, overweight or obesity, hypercholesterolemia, no influence on the development of CD was detected (p>0.05)). Risk factors for the development of CD in hypertension were an burdensome history of CD in closest relatives (2.79 (95% CI 1.15–6.77) relative to practically healthy individuals and 2.41 (1.01–5.88)), high vegetative index (rs +0,15; p<0,05). The correlation between CD and high rates of blood pressure variability according to daily monitoring of blood pressure in patients with hypertension, even under conditions of blood pressure control, is confirmed by the results of correlation and one-factor logit analysis. Thus, elevated levels of systolic blood pressure variability in the day and at night increased the chances of developing CD in patients with hypertension by 2.11 times, (rs = +0.57 and rs = +0.61; p<0.001). It was found that the likelihood of developing cognitive impairment exceeds 50% (high risk) if the level of systolic blood pressure variability is above 12 mm Hg in the day (area under ROC curve AUC = 0.891; 95% CI 0.883–0.940. (AUC = 0.891; 95% CI 0.883–0.940; ST = 82.5% and SP = 92.9%) and at night over 10 mm Hg (AUC = 0.922; 95% CI 0.861–0.963; ST = 82.5% and SP = 85.7%) according to daily blood pressure monitoring. Conclusion The prognosis for the development of cognitive impairment in arterial hypertension is influenced by: evidence of family CD history, autonomic nervous system index and variability of day and night blood pressure characteristics, according to ambulatory daily monitoring data. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicHealthcare Systems and Public HealthFrench-language works237,207