SHORT-TERM COUPLED ASSOCIATION BETWEEN BLOOD PRESSURE AND COGNITIVE FUNCTIONING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An extensive body of research has investigated the association between cognition and blood pressure (BP). Limited research, however, has examined the association at the daily within-person level. No study has yet applied an intensive measurement design utilizing the convenience and objectivity of mobile devices for cognitive assessments and automated BP monitors. To address this gap in the literature, we recruited community-residing healthy adults (N=64; Mage=70.6, SD=3.5; 76.6% female), who recorded their BP and completed a battery of brief cognitive tasks twice daily for 14 days. Multi-level models estimated associations between systolic/diastolic BP (sBP/dBP) and cognitive functioning, adjusting for time-varying self-reported effort, stressors, and physical activity, as well as time-invariant variables (age, sex, education, and anti-hypertensive medication). At the interindividual level, results suggest that individuals with higher overall sBP and dBP relative to others performed worse on delayed-reproduction and visual short-term memory tasks. At the intraindividual level, on occasions when individuals had higher sBP compared to their personal average, they performed relatively worse on delayed-reproduction tasks. Mean sBP was also significant within these models, suggesting that this coupled relationship is stronger for individuals with higher sBP on average. Analyses did not indicate significant associations for working memory, reaction time, or cognitive interference assessments, which may have been due to relatively limited power for between-person analyses. Use of such digital health technology is critical for detecting the complex nature of and interplay between physiological and cognitive processes. Further, research based on intraindividual associations may contribute to strategies aiming to promote lifestyle modifications.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".