↓ Skip to main content

Prospective associations between pulse pressure and cognitive performance in Chinese middle-aged and older population across a 5-year study period

Overview of attention for article published in Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prospective associations between pulse pressure and cognitive performance in Chinese middle-aged and older population across a 5-year study period
Published in
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13195-018-0355-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tingting Sha, Wenwei Cheng, Yan Yan

Abstract

Substantial evidence indicates that the relationship between blood pressure (BP) measures and cognitive functioning is inconsistent, complex, and age-related. Pulse pressure (PP), which can not only reflect arterial stiffness and but also represent the chronic effects of hypertension other than BP itself, has been considered as a better predictor of cognitive impairment. However, evidence on the association of cognitive function with PP has not been investigated extensively. We examined this relationship in a longitudinal study based on the latent growth model (LGM). This study was based on a nationally representative sample of Chinese middle-aged and older participants from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS), a prospective observational study conducted from 2011 to 2016. Cognitive performance was assessed on the basis of three measures of cognition. The PP was calculated as the difference of the average values of three systolic and diastolic BP readings. A series of potential confounders were collected in this research. The LGM was used to examine the effects of PP on cognitive performance at three time points. To test the independent effects of PP on the initial level and the subsequent development of cognition, unconditional and conditional models were compared sequentially. After excluding respondents with missing key variables, we ultimately included 9750 participants in the analysis. Cognitive performance scores and PP showed significant differences across time. After adjustment for the confounders, the standardized coefficients of PP in the LGM indicated negative effects on cognitive performance in elderly Chinese participants at wave 2 and wave 3 (P < 0.01). The initial level of PP in the unconditional model was negatively associated with the initial level (β = - 0.25) and the slope (β = - 0.16) of cognition, whereas these effects were attenuated and the association between intercept of PP and slope of cognition became nonsignificant after controlling for the confounders. The implications of these results demonstrate that a higher PP lowers the cognitive performance of middle-aged and elderly persons independent of a comprehensive set of covariates, but it is not a contributor to the rate of change in cognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 5 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Master 4 10%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 14 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 13%
Psychology 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 3%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 16 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,093,680
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#443
of 1,244 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#47,583
of 332,696 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
#9
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,244 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,696 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.