Cardiovascular Dysautonomia in Patients with Parkinson’s Disease and Hypertension: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Parkinson’s disease (PD) and hypertension are often coexistent conditions that interact in entwined ways at various levels. Cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction (CAD), a non-motor feature of PD occurring across all stages, alters blood pressure (BP) regulation. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study enrolling patients with PD and primary hypertension, without diabetes mellitus or other causes of secondary CAD, aiming to characterize BP profiles/patterns by ambulatory BP monitoring. We also sought associations between different CAD phenotypes and PD characteristics, disability, and cardiovascular comorbidities. Results: We included 47 patients with a median age of 71 years, PD duration of 9 years, and Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) Part III score of 40. Diurnal and nocturnal BP values were within the reference range, but BP load was excessive. Almost one-third had neurogenic orthostatic hypotension (OH) and 80% were non-dippers. The overall burden of non-motor symptoms was significant in these phenotypes. Patients with neurogenic OH were more prone to constipation, anxiety, and urinary problems, whereas gustatory dysfunction, loss of libido, and erectile dysfunction were more frequently reported by non-dippers. No significant differences with regard to cognitive decline were identified in subjects with and without neurogenic OH. Neurogenic OH was symptomatic in 78% of the cases, whereas 56% of those with orthostatic symptoms did not have OH at repeated measurements. Conclusions: Neurogenic OH is an independent predictor of disability in patients with PD and hypertension, after adjusting for PD duration, Hoehn and Yahr stage, levodopa equivalent daily dose (LEDD), and Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".