MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414032356 · doi:10.1161/jaha.124.040013

Association Between Pulse Pressure and Structural Brain Changes in Aging: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Cross‐Sectional and Longitudinal Studies

2025· review· en· W4414032356 on OpenAlexaff
Marina Cecelja, Ryan McNally, Jon O. Cleary, Phil Chowienczyk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisCross-sectional studyPulse pressureAssociation (psychology)Brain agingBlood pressureInternal medicinePathologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between pulse pressure (PP) and age-related structural brain changes including brain volumes, white matter hyperintensities (WMH), fractional anisotropy, silent brain lesions, microbleeds, cerebral blood flow and metabolism, and beta-amyloid accumulation. METHODS: Systematic review of PubMed (MEDLINE), Scopus, and Ovid Embase (from inception to January 2023) and references of included studies among adult populations was conducted. Findings were summarized narratively and by performing a fixed-effects meta-analysis. Publication bias was tested by a funnel plot and Egger's regression asymmetry test. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies (7 longitudinal) were included (>20 000 participants). In cross-sectional studies, PP consistently positively associated with gray matter volume and white matter hyperintensities with pooled standardized regression coefficients of 0.02 (95% CI, 0.007-0.038) and 0.06 (95% CI, 0.021-0.093), SD increase in PP per 1 SD increase in gray matter volume and white matter hyperintensities, higher odds of having a silent brain lesions pooled odds ratio of 1.11 (95% CI, 1.03-1.20) for 1 SD increase in PP, and cortical beta-amyloid (pooled estimate not available). There was limited evidence of an association with hippocampal volume, fractional anisotropy and mean diffusivity, cerebral microbleeds, cerebral blood flow and velocity, and cerebral metabolism. Longitudinal studies reported a negative association between PP and change in hippocampal volume and positive association with cortical beta-amyloid accumulation, but inconsistent findings were reported for total brain volume and white matter hyperintensities. Longitudinal studies were not available for gray matter volume, fractional anisotropy, silent brain lesions, cerebral microbleeds, and metabolism. Meta-regression provided no evidence that mean study-level arterial pressure modified the relationship between PP and associated brain metric. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sectional studies suggest a significant positive association between PP to gray matter volume, WMH, silent brain lesions, and cortical beta-amyloid that warrants further investigation by sufficiently powered longitudinal studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.025
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.361 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionFrench-language works237,207