Brain functional alteration and cognitive performance in cardiovascular diseases: a systematic review of fMRI studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a useful tool to evaluate brain inefficiencies secondary to cardiovascular diseases (CVDs); nevertheless, limited fMRI studies have been conducted to investigate the effect of CVDs on brain functional changes and cognitive function. This systematic review aims to explore, synthesise, and report fMRI outcomes (resting state and task-based) and cognitive performance in patients with CVDs. Methods: Two reviewers independently searched published literature until April 2024 on ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov adhering to the PRISMA protocol. A total of 26 eligible studies were considered for full-text screening, of which 10 were included in this review. The methodological quality was assessed by mixed methods appraisal tool and was reported as empirically fair. Results: Among 336 subjects with CVDs, aged between 49.90 ± 6.10 to 72.20 ± 5.70 years, the majority had coronary artery diseases (n = 177, 52.68%) and hypertension (n = 200, 59.52%), and approximately half of them were females (n = 169, 50.30%). Based on the qualitative synthesis, subjects with CVDs demonstrated an increased cognitive decline (reduced Mini-Mental State Examination/Montreal Cognitive Assessment mean values) and attenuated task performance (lower mean 2-back task scores and slower reaction time). Results also indicated impaired brain activity at the supplementary motor area associated with poor ejection fraction; reduced default mode network suppression linked to high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; lower regional homogeneity and amplitude of low-frequency fluctuation values; and reduced functional connectivity. In summary, alterations in brain networks connectivity may have contributed to an impaired cognitive performance in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Conclusion: It can be extrapolated that CVDs tend to alter the brain network connectivity and result in cognitive impairment and poorer task performance. However, for future imaging studies, more stringent and homogenous demographic data are highly recommended.
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 | 0.012 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".