Korelasi Tekanan Darah dengan Fungsi Kognitif pada Pasien Hipertensi di Puskesmas Kota Lhokseumawe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hypertension, or an elevation of blood pressure, is often asymptomatic and called the “silent disease.” Hypertension is associated with impaired cognitive function that interferes with the patient’s activities. This study aimed to analyze the correlation between blood pressure and cognitive function in patients with hypertension at Community Health Center in Lhokseumawe City. This analytic study with a cross-sectional method employed the consecutive sampling approach from March 17 to April 16, 2021. Cognitive function was examined with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) questionnaire. Spearman rank test was performed to analyze the data. Among sixty patients who participated in this study, thirty-five patients (58.3%) had stage 1 hypertension, whereas 25 (41.7%) had stage 2 hypertension. There were 25 patients (41.7%) with normal cognitive function, 28 patients (46.7%) with mild cognitive impairment, and seven patients (11.7%) with moderate cognitive impairment. Correlation coefficient demonstrated a positive correlation between blood pressure and cognitive function (r=+0.31, p-value=0.016). Uncontrolled hypertension will be a risk factor for cognitive decline. This study concluded that blood pressure is positively correlated with cognitive decline in hypertensive patients at Community Health Center in Lhokseumawe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".