MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415262971 · doi:10.1161/hyp.82.suppl_1.th219

Abstract TH219: Hypertension and Cognitive Decline: A Systematic Review of Epidemiological Links and Intervention Outcomes

2025· article· en· W4415262971 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zaraq Khan, Inshal Jawed, Maqbool Qadir, Kainaat Zahid, Umme Farwa

Bibliographic record

VenueHypertension · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyDementiaBlood pressureCognitionCognitive declineEpidemiologyIntervention (counseling)Stroke (engine)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Midlife hypertension might increase a person's risk of dementia and cognitive decline, but lacks in evidence. Cerebrovascular consequences of chronic hypertension are well-documented, it is unclear, if treating high blood pressure (BP) stops cognitive problems. To better understand how hypertension leads to cognitive decline, we researched and evaluated how using antihypertensive drugs affects the brain. Hypothesis: Intensive antihypertensive therapy aimed at keeping systolic BP below 115 mmHg during middle age (45-65) is more effective in protecting the brain than standard care (keeping it below 140 mmHg). The most significant cognitive protection is observed when this treatment is used for at least 10 years before a person turns 70, as it preserves the structure of brain micro vessels. Methods: PRISMA guidelines were followed to examin how BP or hypertension influences people's cognitive functions. Only 24 studies met the requirements (nine RCTs and fifteen observational studies). We documented the links between raised BP and mental decline, an increase in dementia risk, and how lowering BP supports the mind. We evaluated RCTs using Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool and observational studies with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: Having high BP in midlife led to a faster decline in thinking and a greater risk of dementia. Cohorts studies have confirmed people with hypertension over a long period had increased mental decline than individuals with normal BP. Experimental blood pressure control (such as with systolic <120) appeared to decrease mild cognitive impairment and best preserve thinking skills compared to standard levels. It was difficult to measure the impact of dementia on the limited follow-up time in studies. Studies have reported no benefits and some benefits for cognitive functions from treating high BP. Association studies had high evidence quality, while trial data were moderate because of differences in conducting cognitive assessments. Conclusions: This review identified a knowledge gap by bringing together evidence on the relationship between hypertension and cognitive decline. Evidence suggests that, in midlife, high BP can be modified to help prevent cognitive impairment. Besides, lowering BP very aggressively might help the brain, but the degree to which it slows the development of dementia is not yet known. The results shows controlling BP early matters and encourage more research on how it affects cognitive functions.

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 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)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.605
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHypertensionSame topicCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207