MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321612610 · doi:10.1097/wad.0000000000000542

Carotid Intima-Media Thickness (cIMT) and Cognitive Performance

2023· article· en· W4321612610 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Deepti Vibha, Kameshwar Prasad, Sada Nand Dwivedi, Shashi Kant, Awadh Kishor Pandit, Henning Tiemeier, Achal Kumar Srivastava, Ganesan Karthikeyan, Ajay Garg, Vivek Verma, Amit Kumar, Ashima Nehra, M. Arfan Ikram

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntima-media thicknessMedicineCognitionInternal medicineCognitive declineDementiaPopulationPulse wave velocityMontreal Cognitive AssessmentEpisodic memoryEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceAnxietyCognitive testVerbal memoryCardiologyPsychiatryDiseaseBlood pressureCarotid arteries

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Atherosclerosis has been shown to impact cognitive impairment, with most of the evidence originating from European, African, or East Asian populations that have employed carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) as a biomarker for atherosclerosis. Vascular disease is related to dementia/cognitive decline. There is no community-based study from India that has looked at the association of cIMT with cognitive performance. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study between December 2014 and 2019, we recruited 7505 persons [(mean age 64.6 (9.2) y) and 50.9% women] from a community-dwelling population in New Delhi. These persons underwent carotid ultrasound to quantify cIMT and a cognitive test battery that tapped into memory, processing speed, and executive function. We also computed the general cognitive factor (g-factor), which was identified as the first unrotated component of the principal component analysis and explained 37.4% of all variances in the cognitive tests. We constructed multivariate linear regression models adjusted for age, sex, education, and cardiovascular risk factors. Additional adjustment was made for depression, anxiety, and psychosocial support in the final model. RESULTS: We found a significant association of higher cIMT with worse performance in general cognition (β=-0. 01(95% CI: -0.01; -0.01); P<0.001), processing speed (β=-0.20; 95% CI: -0.34; -0.07); P=0.003), memory (β=-0.29; 95% CI: -0.53; -0.05); P=0.016), and executive function (β=-0.54; 95% CI: -0.75; -0.33); P=<0.001). There was no statistically significant association of cIMT with Mini-Mental Status Examination score (β=0.02; 95% CI: -0.34; 0.40; 0.89). CONCLUSION: The cross-sectional study found significant associations of increased cIMT with worse performance in global cognition, information processing, memory, and executive function.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer Disease & Associated DisordersSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207