COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT AND CAROTID INTIMA-MEDIA THICKNESS IN PATIENTS WITH RESISTANCE HYPERTENSION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To determine predictors of cognitive impairment in patients with resistance hypertensin (RH) after 3-years of follow-up. Design and method: In 98 patients with RH (average age 52.4 ± 1.2, 60 males, mean hypertension history at the baseline 12.8 ± 0.9 years) we measured office blood pressure, ultrasonographically diameter (D) of common carotid (CCA) artery, carotid intima-media thickness (IMT), performed Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) test, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring twice: initially and after a mean period of 3 years. Also morning fasting venous blood samples were obtained from all subjects for uric acid, lipid profile, glucose assays. Age and other cardiovascular risk factors were included in the analysis. Results: There was a significant deterioration in the MoCA results during the follow-up: 23.2 ± 0.2 at the baseline vs 22.6 ± 0.2 after 3 years, p = 0,02. The cognitive decline was significantly associated with initial measurement of IMT (b = -0.232, p = 0.01). This association was independent of age, body mass index and hypertension history. No statistically significant associations were obtained between the MoCA results and systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, triglycerides, LDL cholesterol, serum uric acid, glucose. Conclusions: Our data suggested that cognitive impairment in patients with resistance hypertension associated with severity of the carotid structure damage and carotid intima-media thickness at the baseline was independent predictor of cognitive decline in these patients.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".