ASSOCIATION OF AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE WITH FRONTAL CORTICAL THICKNESS AND HIPPOCAMPAL VOLUME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: In the elderly, the effect of blood pressure on brain structure or cognitive function has not been clear. However, there are limitations in that most of studies was done using serial change in clinic blood pressure. We sought to determine the association of the ambulatory blood pressure over time with the brain structural alterations and cognitive function Design and method: In this study, we sought to examine the association between blood pressure and brain structure/cognitive function in the elderly over the age of 60 by using the 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure information at 2 different visits (mean time interval is 3.4 years). From October 2018, we included participants performed Korean Mini Mental State Exam; older than 60 years old among the participants in Cardiovascular and Metabolic Disease Etiology Research Center-High Risk Cohort. Results: When we divided the 170 participants into two groups according to the control of cumulative average daytime blood pressure, the cortical thickness of frontal lobe was thinner and the average hippocampal volume was smaller in the uncontrolled group (P = 0.002, P = 0.01 respectively). In multivariate linear analysis, the uncontrolled group for cumulative average daytime blood pressure was associated with thinner cortical thickness of frontal lobe and smaller average hippocampal volume (P = 0.007, P = 0.024 respectively). However, the baseline daytime blood pressure had no associations with brain structure or cognitive function. Conclusions: Our observations suggest that serial measurements of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure may be important to assess the cumulative pressure load and the association with structural changes of the brain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".