Association of brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity with cognitive impairment in peritoneal dialysis patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The relationship between cognitive impairment (CI) and arterial stiffness in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients has not been clearly clarified. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between CI and arterial stiffness in PD patients.Methods This cross-sectional study enrolled PD patients who performed a vascular profiler test at a single PD center in China between January 2014 and June 2016. The cognitive function was evaluated using the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA). A noninvasive vascular screening device was used to assess arterial stiffness relevant indicators.Results A total of 643 PD patients with median age 45 (37–57.4) years and median duration of PD 27.8 (8.7–56.4) months were enrolled. The rate of CI was 49.9%. The mean brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (baPWV) was 17.2 ± 5.6 m/s. Compared with normal cognitive function group, patients with CI had higher baPWV (18.6 ± 7.0 vs. 15.8 ± 3.2 m/s), systolic blood pressure (150.3 ± 21.5 vs. 144.2 ± 20.2 mmHg), and pulse pressure (59.7 ± 14.7 vs. 52.5 ± 11.6 mmHg), and lower ankle-brachial index (ABI, 1.12 ± 0.12 vs. 1.15 ± 0.09) (all p<.05). Compared with systolic blood pressure, pulse pressure, and ABI in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, baPWV had better performance in predicting CI (area under curve: 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.64–0.72). BaPWV was independently associated with MoCA score (B per SD, −0.42 [95% confidence interval, −0.71 to −0.12]; p = .006) and CI (OR per SD, 1.55 [95% confidence interval, 1.11–2.17]; p = .011) in PD patients after adjustment for confounders.Conclusions Higher baPWV was independently associated with CI in PD patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".