RELATIONSHIP OF PARAMETERS OF CENTRAL HEMODYNAMICS AND ARTERIAL STIFFNESS WITH COGNITIVE FUNCTIONS IN PATIENTS WITH ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To conduct a correlation analysis of central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness parameters with cognitive functions in patients with essential hypertension (EH). Design and method: The study included 111 male and female patients with grades I–III AH according to the classification (ESC/ESH, 2018). The average age of the patients was 54.6±10.8 years, the average duration of AH was 8.8±5.52 years. The state of arterial stiffness was assessed by applanation tonometry using the SphygmoCor apparatus (AtCor Medical, Australia). Cognitive functions were assessed using neuro-psychological tests: the Mini-Cog test (drawing a clock, reproducing words) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MOCA). Results: The correlation analysis between the parameters of central hemodynamics and arterial stiffness revealed a negative correlation between the pulse wave velocity (PWV) and the severity of cognitive impairment, in particular, with the overall Mini-Cog score (R=-0.24, p=0.01), as well as central pulse pressure (CPP) with a total score on the Mini-Cog test (R=-0.27, p=0.007). Conclusions: Thus, an increase in pulse wave velocity and central pulse pressure correlates with the severity of cognitive impairment in EH patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".