Cortical thinning is associated with brain pulsatility in older adults: An MRI and NIRS study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging is accompanied by global brain atrophy occurring unequally across the brain. Cortical thinning is seen with aging with a larger loss in the frontal and temporal subregions. We explored the link between regional cortical thickness and regional cerebral pulsatility. Sixty healthy individuals were divided into two age groups, young (aged 19-31) and older (aged 65-75) adults. Each participant underwent a near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) scan to index regional brain pulsatility from cerebral pulse-transit-time-to-the peak-of-the-pulse (PTTp), an anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and a phase-contrast MRI (PC-MRI) scan to measure arterial and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pulsatility. In older adults, the greatest association between cerebral pulsatility and cortical thickness was found in superior and middle temporal and superior, middle and inferior frontal areas, which are the regions perfused first by the internal carotid arteries. This association dropped in the postcentral and superior parietal regions. These findings suggest higher brain pulsatility as a potential risk factor contributing to cortical thinning for some brain regions more than others.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".