MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CAROTID VASCULAR RESISTANCE ASSOCIATED WITH COGNITIVE FUNCTION AMONG MIDDLE-AGE ADULTS

2021· article· en· W3153352307 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Shao‐Yuan Chuang, Hao Cheng, Yu Ting Ko, Wen -Ling Lau, Pei Ning Wang, Wen Pan, Chen Huan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentCardiologyInternal medicinePulse wave velocityBlood pressurePopulationVascular resistanceHemodynamicsPulse pressureCognitive impairmentDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Carotid flow velocity and peripheral blood pressure were independently associated with cognitive function among the elderly population, but unknown among middle-aged adults. We aimed to investigate the association between carotid hemodynamics and cognitive performance among the middle-age population. Design and method: A total of 490 middle-age adults (between 30 and 60 years) participated in the ongoing survey (2017–2020) of the Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors two-Township study and received the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA) to evaluate the global cognitive function. Carotid-formal pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV) was measured using carotid and femoral arterial tonometry. Carotid vascular resistance was calculated by mean carotid pressure divided into mean carotid volume flow. Results: MOCA levels were similar between men and women (27.1 vs. 27.2, p = 0.6036). Age(r = -0.22, P < 0.001), and education(r = 0.39, p < 0.001) were associated with MOCA. Controlled for age, gender and education, peak systolic velocity (r = 0.077 @left; r = 0.012@Right, all p > 0.05), end diastolic velocity (r = 0.029, r = -0.062, all p > 0.05), mean flow (r = 0.060; r = -0.038, all p > 0.05), carotid resistive index (r = 0.020, r = 0.05, all p > 0.05), carotid pulsatility(r = 0.015; r = 0.058; p > 0.05), diameter(r = 0.060; r = -0.008, all p > 0.05) at both sides were not associated with MOCA. Only carotid vascular resistance (CVR) at left side was associated with MOCA (r = -0.158, p = 0.0010), but not at right carotid artery (r = -0.030, p = 0.5369). CVR@Left (standard beta = -0.144; p = 0.0022) remains associated with MOCA in the multivariable with further controlling glucose, low density lipoprotein and carotid-formal pulse wave velocity. Those with top, 2nd and 3th quartile of CVR@left had 2.4-fold [Odds Ratio = 2.40; 95% confidence intervals = 1.14–5.04], 1.95-fold(1.95;0.93–4.07) and 0.99-fold (0.99;0.45–2.17) risk for poor cognitive performance (MOCA < 26), compared to those with lowest quartile of CVR@left in the multivariable model. Conclusions: Carotid vascular resistance is a marker of cerebrovascular resistance and associated with cognitive performance in middle-aged adults.

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)0.000
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HypertensionSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207