Association between central blood pressure, arterial stiffness and low cognitive scores in South African adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The burden of hypertension in South Africa, as well as the successive cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is increasing. Hypertension presents a risk for subsequent cognitive impairment with age. This study sought to determine the association between blood pressure, arterial stiffness, using pulse wave velocity and pulse amplification pressure, and cognitive function in younger and older adults from a 30yr old urban South African birth cohort study. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study among n=93 index children (now age 29yr) and their mothers (all women). We collected peripheral and central blood pressure (BP) variables, and conducted a cognitive assessment using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument and analysed the association of BP variables with global cognitive tests and specific domains. Results Forty percent of the pooled sample had low MoCA total scores, and 32% of the total sample had hypertension. No associations were found in the regression analysis between BP related variables and total MoCA scores. Also, no associations were found between peripheral and central BP variables with individual cognitive domains when stratified by age. A significant relationship was found between mean pressure and low visual perception (i.e. the ability to interpret information that is seen and give it meaning; p=0.02). Conclusion Central mean pressure is associated with low visual perception domain among black women. These findings add to the growing evidence which suggests that central BP variables are important to explore as exposure proxies for studying the association of BP and cognitive decline especially at mid-life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".