MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Hypertension Coincident with Type 2 Diabetes Worsen Cognitive Function and Arterial Stiffness

2022· article· en· W4212853615 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Medical Association of Thailand · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArterial stiffnessBlood pressureMedicinePulse wave velocityInternal medicineCardiologyDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesPulse pressureType 2 Diabetes MellitusCognitionEndocrinologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The prevalence of concomitant of hypertension (HT) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM) mellitus have increased. However, the additional contribution of high blood pressure to T2DM on cognitive and vascular functions has not been published. Objective: To compare the vascular functions and cognitive function among hypertensive with type 2 diabetic patients, hypertensive patients, and age-match healthy participants. Materials and Methods: Twenty-three hypertensive-diabetic, 25 HT, and 23 sedentary individuals were included in this study. Using the crosssectional design, the vascular functions were assessed with pulse wave velocity (PWV) and flow-mediated dilation (FMD) among the three groups. Global cognitive function tests were performed using Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MOCA). Results: The hypertensive-diabetic group had higher brachial systolic blood pressure (SBP) (p<0.05), mean arterial pressure (MAP) (p<0.05), and pulse pressure (PP) (p<0.05) than the sedentary group. In addition, the hypertensive-diabetic patients had significantly higher PWV and worse cognitive performance than hypertensive and healthy participants (p<0.05) but did not significantly differ in FMD. Arterial stiffness, blood pressure, and fasting blood glucose were associated with level of cognitive performance (p<0.05). Conclusion: Arterial stiffness and blood pressure are a determinant of cognitive functions in hypertensive diabetic subjects but not in individuals with hypertension without diabetes. These results suggested the additional effects of hyperglycemia on high blood pressure might worsen the cognitive functions through higher level of arterial stiffness and blood pressure. Keywords: Cognitive function; Arterial stiffness; Type 2 diabetes; Hypertension

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Medical Association of ThailandSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207