Association between cerebral blood flow variation and cognitive decline in older patients undergoing hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background The mechanism of cognitive impairment in hemodialysis patients is multifactorial. The relationship between cerebral blood flow and the decline of cognitive function is poorly understood. Objective To investigate the association between cerebral blood flow variation and decline of cognitive function in older patients undergoing hemodialysis. Methods In this prospective observational cohort study of 121 older patients undergoing hemodialysis, we used transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) to measure cerebral arterial mean flow velocity (MFV) throughout dialysis, assessed cognitive function at baseline and 12-month follow-up, and then analyzed associations between MFV and changes on cognitive scores. Results TCD recordings demonstrated a significant reduction in MFV throughout dialysis, which were significantly correlated with cumulative ultrafiltration volume (rho 0.356, p < 0.001), ΔSBP (rho 0.251, p = 0.005), and ΔMAP (rho 0.194, p = 0.032). Compared with the baseline assessments, cognitive scores of participants at the 12-month follow-up were significantly worsened in global cognition (MOCA), some tests of memory (CFT-memory), executive function (TMT-B, SCWT-C, and SCWT-T), attention/processing speed (SDMT), and visuospatial function (CFT-copy) (p < 0.05). The worsening scores in global cognition (MOCA) (β = 0.066, 95% CI 0.018–0.113, p = 0.007) and some tests of memory (AVLT5) (β = 0.050, 95% CI 0.004–0.097, p = 0.035) and executive function (TMT-B, SCWT-C, SCWT-T) (β = 1.955, 95% CI 0.457–3.453, p = 0.011; β = 0.298, 95% CI 0.112–0.484, p = 0.002 and β = 1.371, 95% CI 0.429–2.303, p = 0.004, respectively) were significantly associated with the reduction of MFV. Conclusion Hemodialysis may significantly reduce cerebral blood flow in older patients; Repetitive intradialytic decreases in CBF may be one of the mechanisms underlying the decline of cognitive function. Clinical trial registration https://register.clinicaltrials.gov/prs/app/action/SelectProtocol?sid=S000C5B5&selectaction=Edit&uid=U0003QEL&ts=4&cx=-djoi2
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".