Effects of Vascular Comorbidity on Cognition in Multiple Sclerosis Are Partially Mediated by Changes in Brain Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Vascular comorbidities are associated with reduced cognitive performance and with changes in brain structure in people with multiple sclerosis (MS). Understanding causal pathways is necessary to support the design of interventions to mitigate the impacts of comorbidities, and to monitor their effectiveness. We assessed the inter-relationships among vascular comorbidity, cognition and brain structure in people with MS. Methods: Adults with neurologist-confirmed MS reported comorbidities, and underwent assessment of their blood pressure, HbA1c, and cognitive functioning (i.e., Symbol Digit Modalities Test, California Verbal Learning Test, Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised, and verbal fluency). Test scores were converted to age-, sex-, and education-adjusted z-scores. Whole brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was completed, from which measures of thalamic and hippocampal volumes, and mean diffusivity of gray matter and normal-appearing white matter were converted to age and sex-adjusted z-scores. Canonical correlation analysis was used to identify linear combinations of cognitive measures (cognitive variate) and MRI measures (MRI variate) that accounted for the most correlation between the cognitive and MRI measures. Regression analyses were used to test whether MRI measures mediated the relationships between the number of vascular comorbidities and cognition measures. Results: = 0.0035). The biggest contributors to the cognitive variate were the SDMT and CVLT-II, and to the MRI variate were gray matter MD and thalamic volume. The correlation between cognitive and MRI variates was 0.50; these variates were used in regression analyses. On regression analysis, vascular comorbidity was associated with the MRI variate, and with the cognitive variate. After adjusting for the MRI variate, vascular comorbidity was not associated with the cognitive variate. Conclusion: Vascular comorbidity is associated with lower cognitive function in people with MS and this association is partially mediated via changes in brain macrostructure and microstructure.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.004 | 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".