MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414985646 · doi:10.1186/s13089-025-00445-1

Cerebrovascular reactivity metrics as predictors of cognitive performance in healthy ageing: insights from transcranial colour-coded ultrasound

2025· article· en· W4414985646 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Ultrasound Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong Polytechnic University
KeywordsCognitionEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceCognitive impairmentTranscranial DopplerIdentification (biology)Neurology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: This study was designed to investigate the utility of cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) metrics, derived from transcranial colour-coded Doppler ultrasound (TCCD). Three main CVR metrics were examined as potential markers for cerebrovascular risk associated with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a stage between normal cognition and dementia. METHODS: We investigated 122 eligible, stroke-free, healthy, community-based Chinese adults (mean age, 65.34 ± 6.86 years). Cognitive performance was assessed using the validated Hong Kong version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. On a scale of 0-30, participants with low scores < 26 (modelled according to level of education) were designated to have a mild neurocognitive disorder or MCI. Following the measurement of cerebrovascular conductance (CVC) derived from cerebral blood flow and mean arterial pressure, three physiologic CVR metrics were assessed. The CVR assessments were based on restricted 30 s breath-holding, 60 s hyperventilation, and an unrestricted breath-holding index (BHI), respectively quantified using transcranial colour-coded Doppler ultrasound. The predictabilities and associations between CVR metrics, haemodynamic parameters, and cognitive performance were statistically investigated. RESULTS: Using TCCD, BHI emerged as the most accurate and robust metric of CVR for predicting mild cognitive disorders [AUC 0.827 (95% CI 0.725, 0.930)] and independently predicted overall cognitive performance, highlighting its clinical value for early identification of at-risk individuals. The three CVR metrics outperformed CVC in predicting mild cognitive impairment and were distinctively correlated. Although CVR measures by breath-holding and BHI were closely related (r = 0.704, 95% CI 0.598, 0.786, p < 0.001), Bland-Altman analysis revealed that they are not interchangeable, indicating the importance of metric selection for accurate cerebrovascular assessment. CONCLUSION: The BHI, derived from simple and clinically tolerable methods, demonstrates clear potential to enhance the prediction and early identification of vascular cognitive impairment in healthy adults. By leveraging insights from cerebral haemodynamics, TCCD-based cerebrovascular risk screening may enable more effective and targeted interventions, ultimately contributing to better long-term cognitive health outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.276 · 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