Orthostatic hypotension assessed by active standing is associated with worse cognition in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients, RESORT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients who suffer from acute and chronic diseases that aggravate blood pressure (BP) dysregulation, may be particularly susceptible to orthostatic hypotension (OH). OH may increase the risk of cerebral small vessel disease and subsequent white matter hyperintensities inducing cognitive impairment (CI). This study investigates the association between OH and cognition in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Geriatric rehabilitation inpatients of the observational, longitudinal REStORing health of acutely unwell adulTs (RESORT) cohort in Melbourne, Australia, underwent intermittent BP measurements during active standing or partial postural change to sitting (when unable to stand). OH was defined as a systolic BP drop ≥20 mmHg and/or diastolic BP drop ≥10 mmHg within three minutes after postural change. CI included dementia diagnosis, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score <24 points (categorized as 18-23 (mild CI) and <18 points (severe CI)), Montreal Cognitive Assessment score <26 points or Rowland Universal Dementia Assessment Scale score <23 points. RESULTS: In geriatric rehabilitation inpatients (n=1232, mean age 82.3 years (SD 8.2), 57.5% female), OH, CI and dementia prevalence was 20.0%, 61.0% and 20.4% respectively. MMSE was scored 18-23 in 32.6% and <18 points in 27.8% of patients (n=1033). In standing patients (51.7%), OH was associated with CI (p=0.045) and dementia (p=0.021), with a trend for MMSE scores <18 points (p=0.080), but not for MMSE scores 18-23 points (p=0.528). No association was found between seated OH and cognition. CONCLUSION: OH assessed by active standing using intermittent BP measurements was associated with worse cognition in geriatric rehabilitation inpatients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".