Predictores de riesgo de deterioro cognitivo leve en una población de hipertensos.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cognitive status is considered a biomarker of vascular brain damage caused by hypertension (HTN). Screening for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is essential in patients with HTN. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of predictors of MCI in hypertensive patients. Methods: We conducted an observational and cross-sectional study between 2015 and 2023. All the patients > 18 years treated in a clinic and who were evaluated with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) were included. A score < 24 in the MoCA test was considered abnormal. Patients with motor or sensory impairment, psychiatric disorders, or illiteracy were excluded. Qualitative variables are presented as absolute frequencies and percentages, and the chi-square test was used to analyze their association. Quantitative variables are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and were compared with the independent samples t-test. All the variables with statistical significance in the univariate analysis through forward selection were included in the multiple logistic regression analysis. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 129 patients were included (women-to-men ratio 2:1; mean age 60 years); 79.1% had stage 3 HTN, time from HTN diagnosis was > 20 years in 30.4%, 52.7% had complete primary education, 89.4% had overweight/obesity, 36.4% were smokers and 29.7% had mixed dyslipidemia. A score ≥ 24 in the MoCA was present in 65.1% and 34.9% had a score < 24. The logistic predictor model identified time from HTN diagnosis, mixed dyslipidemia and cerebrovascular disease as predictors of abnormal MoCA. A tertiary educational level had a protective effect. Conclusions: Identifying predictors of cognitive impairment is a priority to take preventive actions. In this study, time from HTN diagnosis, mixed dyslipidemia, cerebrovascular disease and educational level were associated with cognitive impairment. How to cite this article: Mas VD, Rivero MN, Spósito PM, Cuba X, Llorens SM. Predictors of Mild Cognitive Impairment in a Hypertensive Population. Rev Argent Cardiol 2023;91:403-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.7775/rac.v91.i6.20709
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".