The effects of blood pressure on post stroke cognitive impairment: BP and PSCI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive function following acute ischemic stroke (AIS) is critical to prognosis and quality of life. Hypertension is a risk factor for stroke and is associated with post stroke cognitive impairment (PSCI). However, the optimal blood pressure parameters after AIS is unknown. This is a sub-study of the Impairment of CognitiON and Sleep after acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack in Chinese patients (ICONS) study conducted between August 2015 and March 2018. Cognition was assessed at two-week (2w), three-month (3 m), and twelve-month (12 m) by Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). A total of 682 participants who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled. The primary outcome was cognitive changes after 3 and 12 months post stroke. Among 682 participants, the mean age was 59.35 ± 10.40 years and 72.29% were men. PSCI patients with high systolic blood pressure (SBP ≥140 mm Hg) at 3 m not only had worse cognition as evidenced by MoCA scores at 3 m but also predicted worse scores at 12 m. When participants were stratified into cognitively stable/improved (MoCA score ≥0, 2w vs. 12 m) and cognitively impaired (MoCA score ≤-2, 2w vs. 12 m), those with high SBP were more likely to be cognitively impaired (OR 2.17, 95%CI 1.12-4.21, p < .05) and less likely to be cognitively stable/improved (OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.44-0.99, p < .05). SBP more than 140 mm Hg is associated with worse cognitive performance after ischemic stroke. Patients with SBP lower than 140 mm Hg have better cognitive outcome at 3-month and 1 year after stroke.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".