Excess pressure but not pulse wave velocity is associated with cognitive function impairment: a community-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cf-PWV), an index of mainly distal aortic stiffness, has been inconsistently associated with cognitive function. Excess pressure, derived from the arterial reservoir-excess pressure analysis, may integrate the pulsatile load of the proximal aorta. The present study examined whether increased excess pressure is associated with cognitive function impairment in community adults. METHODS: A total of 992 community participants (69.5% females; mean age: 67.3 years; education 13.6 years) without cerebrovascular disease or dementia received the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) to evaluate global cognition. Arterial reservoir and excess pressure, arterial stiffness, and wave reflections were assessed, using carotid tonometry and aortic Doppler flowmetry. RESULTS: Excess pressure integral (XSPI), percentage XSPI, cf-PWV, characteristic impedance (Zc), and forward and backward pressure amplitude (Pf, Pb, respectively) were significantly higher in 197 participants (19.9%) with a low MoCA score (<26 or <25, depending on level of education). In multivariable analyses, XSPI (standardized odds ratio, 95% confidence interval, 1.30, 1.06-1.59), and percentage XSPI (1.27, 1.06-1.52) but not cf-PWV (1.04, 0.85-1.26) were significantly associated with a low MoCA. Further analysis revealed that Pf and Zc were the major determinants of XSPI (partial R2: Pf = 0.656, Zc = 0.467) and percentage XSPI (Pf = 0.459, Zc = 0.371). In contrast, age, instead of Pf and Zc, was the major determinant of cf-PWV (partial R2: age = 0.187). CONCLUSIONS: Excess pressure (XSPI/percentage XSPI), mainly determined by the pulsatile hemodynamics of the proximal aorta, was significantly associated with cognitive function impairment in middle-aged and elderly community adults.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".