Probing Evidence of Cerebral White Matter Microstructural Disruptions in Ischemic Heart Disease Before and Following Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Diffusion Tensor <scp>MR</scp> Imaging Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ischemic heart disease (IHD) is linked to brain white matter (WM) breakdown but how age or disease effects WM integrity, and whether it is reversible using cardiac rehabilitation (CR), remains unclear. PURPOSE: To assess the effects of brain aging, cardiovascular disease, and CR on WM microstructure in brains of IHD patients following a cardiac event. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective. POPULATION: Thirty-five IHD patients (9 females; mean age = 59 ± 8 years), 21 age-matched healthy controls (10 females; mean age = 59 ± 8 years), and 25 younger controls (14 females; mean age = 26 ± 4 years). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: 3 T diffusion-weighted imaging with single-shot echo planar imaging acquired at 3 months and 9 months post-cardiac event. ASSESSMENT: Tract-based spatial statistics (TBSS) and tractometry were used to compare fractional anisotropy (FA), mean diffusivity (MD), axial diffusivity (AD), and radial diffusivity (RD) in cerebral WM between: 1) older and younger controls to distinguish age-related from disease-related WM changes; 2) IHD patients at baseline (pre-CR) and age-matched controls to investigate if cardiovascular disease exacerbates age-related WM changes; and 3) IHD patients pre-CR and post-CR to investigate the neuroplastic effect of CR on WM microstructure. STATISTICAL TESTS: Two-sample unpaired t-test (age: older vs. younger controls; IHD: IHD pre-CR vs. age-matched controls). One-sample paired t-test (CR: IHD pre- vs. post-CR). Statistical threshold: P < 0.05 (FWE-corrected). RESULTS: TBSS and tractometry revealed widespread WM changes in older controls compared to younger controls while WM clusters of decreased FA in the fornix and increased MD in body of corpus callosum were observed in IHD patients pre-CR compared to age-matched controls. Robust WM improvements (increased FA, increased AD) were observed in IHD patients post-CR. DATA CONCLUSION: In IHD, both brain aging and cardiovascular disease may contribute to WM disruptions. IHD-related WM disruptions may be favorably modified by CR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".