Associations of Intracranial Artery Length and Branch Number on Time‐of‐Flight <scp>MRA</scp> With Cognitive Impairment in Hypertensive Older Males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension-induced impairment of the cerebral artery network contributes to cognitive impairment. Characterizing the structure and function of cerebral arteries may facilitate the understanding of hypertension-related pathological mechanisms and lead to the development of new indicators for cognitive impairment. PURPOSE: To investigate the associations between morphological features of the intracranial arteries distal to the circle of Willis on time-of-flight MRA (TOF-MRA) and cognitive performance in a hypertensive cohort. STUDY TYPE: Prospective observational study. POPULATION: 189 hypertensive older males (mean age 64.9 ± 7.2 years). FIELD STRENGTH/SEQUENCE: TOF-MRA sequence with a 3D spoiled gradient echo readout and arterial spin labeling perfusion imaging sequence with a 3D stack-of-spirals fast spin echo readout at 3T. ASSESSMENT: The intracranial arteries were segmented from TOF-MRA and the total length of distal arteries (TLoDA) and number of arterial branches (NoB) were calculated. The mean gray matter cerebral blood flow (GM-CBF) was extracted from arterial spin labeling perfusion imaging. The cognitive level was assessed with short-term and long-term delay-recall auditory verbal learning test (AVLT) scores, and with montreal cognitive assessment. STATISTICAL TESTS: Univariable and multivariable linear regression were used to analyze the associations between TLoDA, NoB, GM-CBF and the cognitive assessment scores, with P < 0.05 indicating significance. RESULTS: TLoDA (r = 0.314) and NoB (r = 0.346) were significantly correlated with GM-CBF. Multivariable linear regression analyses showed that TLoDA and NoB, but not GM-CBF (P = 0.272 and 0.141), were significantly associated with short-term and long-term delay-recall AVLT scores. These associations remained significant after adjusting for GM-CBF. DATA CONCLUSION: The TLoDA and NoB of distal intracranial arteries on TOF-MRA are significantly associated with cognitive impairment in hypertensive subjects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 3.
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".