Depression, anxiety and motivation in arterial hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vascular depression hypothesis posits that cerebrovascular diseases are a major risk factor for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). Arterial hypertension (AH) is one of the main causes of cerebrovascular diseases. Objective: to assess the relationship between anxiety, depression and apathy in the patients with AH with case history, clinical features and neuroimaging. Patients and methods . 65 hypertensive outpatient were examined (mean age – 57.17±10.76 years). Cognitive status was evaluated with MiniMental State Examination, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Frontal Assessment Battery. EBD was assessed with Beck Depression Scale, Spielberger Anxiety Questionnaire, and Robert's Apathy Scale. The Fazekas scale was used to determine the severity of leukoaraiosis. Results and discussion. Significant depression was present in 66.2%, anxiety – in 41.5%, and apathy – in 80% of hypertensive patients. Blood pressure level (p<0.05) and AH duration (p<0,05) were significantly associated with the severity of each EBD included in the analysis (anxiety, depression, apathy). Depression, anxiety, and apathy scores were significantly higher (p<0.01) in patients with hypertension-mediated organ damage or associated clinical conditions. A negative correlation was found between the severity of depression, anxiety and apathy and cognitive scores (p<0.01). Depression, anxiety and apathy were significantly (p<0.05) higher in patients with higher Fazecas score. Conclusion . Advanced AH is associated with an increased risk of EBD including depression, anxiety and apathy. These EBD develop together with cognitive impairment and vascular leukoencephalopathy. The study results can emphasize the pathogenetic impact of AH associated cerebral ischemia in EBD development.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".