Longitudinal association of hypertension and dyslipidemia with cognitive function in community-dwelling older adults: the SONIC study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The associations among cognitive function, hypertension, and dyslipidemia in older adults are controversial. Therefore, we investigated the associations among cognitive decline, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and their combination in community-dwelling older people in their 70s, 80s, and 90s in the long-term observational Septuagenarians, Octogenarians, Nonagenarians, Investigation with Centenarians (SONIC) study. We administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Japanese version (MoCA-J) by trained geriatricians and psychologists, and conducted blood testing and blood pressure (BP) measuring by medical staff involving 1186 participants. We performed multiple regression analysis to assess the relationships among hypertension, dyslipidemia, their combination, and lipid and BP levels with cognitive function at the 3-year follow-up after adjusting for covariate factors. At the baseline, the percentage of the combination of hypertension and dyslipidemia was 46.6% (n = 553), hypertension was 25.6% (n = 304), dyslipidemia was 15.0% (n = 178), and that without hypertension or dyslipidemia was 12.7% (n = 151). Conducting multiple regression analysis, no significant correlation was found between the combination of hypertension and dyslipidemia and MoCA-J score. In the group with the combination, high high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL) levels resulted in higher MoCA-J scores at the follow-up (β = 0.06; P < 0.05) and high diastolic BP (DBP) also resulted in higher MoCA-J scores (β = 0.08; P < 0.05). The results suggest that high HDL and DBP levels of individuals with HT & DL and high SBP levels of individuals with HT were associated with cognitive function in community-dwelling older adults. In the SONIC study, which is an epidemiological study of Japanese older persons aged 70 years or older, a disease-specific examination suggested that high HDL and DBP levels of individuals with hypertension & dyslipidemia and high SBP levels of individuals with hypertension were associated with maintaining cognitive function in community-dwelling older 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".