MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390193563 · doi:10.1002/alz.076838

Executive function performance depends on hypertension in individuals with sub‐threshold total Hachinski score

2023· article· en· W4390193563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jaqueline Flores, Tejaswi Sudhakar, Taylor Pedersen, Cole E Anderson, Elaine R. Peskind, Ge Li, Jeffrey J. Iliff, Swati Rane Levendovszky

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionExecutive dysfunctionMontreal Cognitive AssessmentVascular dementiaDementiaPsychologyExecutive functionsVerbal memoryTrail Making TestAudiologyMedicineInternal medicineCognitive impairmentPsychiatryDiseaseNeuropsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The Hachinski Ischemia Scale (HIS) differentiates AD and vascular dementia and is used to include individuals with minimal vascular risk factors in ADNI i.e., HIS ≤ 4. HIS score includes history of hypertension (HMHYPERT), a known risk for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and vascular dementia. Cerebrovascular disease affects performance on tasks involving executive function, such as, planning and processing speed more than memory. Here, we determined if HMHYPERT scores influences executive functioning in all ADNI3 participants with normal cognition (CN) and MCI even with minimal vascular risks. Method We included a total of 272 participants (102 MCI, age = 74± 8 [42F, 50 HMHYPERT>0], MoCA = 23 ±3 and 170 CN, age = 73 ±6, [109F, 62 HMHYPERT>0], MoCA = 26 ±3), who underwent HIS, Trails Making Test B, Clock Drawing and Copy scores for executive function, and The Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and Logical Memory Test (LOGMEM) scores for memory performance within 12 months. We converted both memory tests into z‐scores and created a composite memory score. Similarly, we created a composite executive function score. To determine if HMHYPERT was associated particularly with executive function, we ran the linear regression analyses twice for the two composite cognitive scores. The following model was used: Composite score ∼ Normalized Age + Sex + Cognitive status * HMHYPERT. Result Executive function: Fig. 1 A shows scores for Trails B, Clock Draw and Clock Copy. The regression analysis showed that executive function was associated with only sex and HYMHYPERT (p<0.05). Memory function Fig. 1 B shows scores for Logical Memory and RAVLT tests in CN and MCI. As expected, MCI groups demonstrate the lowest averages compared to CN groups. As expected, regression analysis showed that memory performance was strongly determined by diagnostic status (p<0.001). Age was significantly associated with memory performance (p<0.05). HMHYPERT was only marginally significantly associated with memory performance (p = 0.08). Conclusion Using HMHYPERT score as a measure of vascular risk, we observed notable differences in executive function. Although HIS scores ≤ 4 minimize vascular pathology in ADNI3, cognitive performance is still associated with these scores.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→