Short Sleep Duration and Hypertension: A Double Hit for the Brain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Short sleep duration has been associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment and dementia. Short sleep is associated with elevated blood pressure, yet the combined insult of short sleep and hypertension on brain health remains unclear. We assessed whether the association of sleep duration with cognition and vascular brain injury was moderated by hypertensive status. Methods and Results A total of 682 dementia‐free participants (mean age, 62±9 years; 53% women) from the Framingham Heart Study completed assessments of cognition, office blood pressure, and self‐reported habitual and polysomnography‐derived sleep duration; 637 underwent brain magnetic resonance imaging. Linear regressions were performed to assess effect modification by hypertensive status on total sleep time (coded in hours) and cognitive and magnetic resonance imaging outcomes. There was a significant interaction between sleep duration and hypertensive status when predicting executive function/processing speed (Trail Making B‐A) and white matter hyperintensities. When results were stratified by hypertensive status, longer sleep duration was associated with better executive functioning/processing speed scores in the hypertensive group (meaning that shorter sleep duration was associated with poorer executive function/processing speed scores) (self‐report sleep: β=0.041 [95% CI, 0.012–0.069], P =0.005; polysomnography sleep: β=0.045 [95% CI, 0.002–0.087], P =0.038), but no association was observed for the normotensive group. Similarly, shorter subjective sleep duration was associated with higher white matter hyperintensity burden in the hypertensive group (β=−0.115 [95% CI, −0.227 to −0.004], P =0.042), but not in the normotensive group. Conclusions In individuals with hypertension, shorter sleep duration was associated with worse cognitive performance and greater brain injury.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".