Back

Variations in the Effect of Pulse Pressure on Cognition Based on Blood Pressure

Saeed, M.; Murchison, C.; Geldmacher, D.; Wheeler, K. M.; Roberson, E. D.; Del Bene, V. A.

2025-11-19 neurology
10.1101/2025.11.17.25340451 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundAn increase in pulse pressure, the difference between systolic and diastolic blood pressure, has emerged as a predictor of cognitive impairment in older adults. However, its predictive utility relative to blood pressure status and potential differential effects based on blood pressure status remain unclear. MethodsThis study used data from the ACTIVE trial (N = 2,802 adults aged 65+) to examine the association between pulse pressure and cognitive decline over 10 years. Linear mixed-effects models assessed the relationship between pulse pressure, blood pressure, and decline in global cognition, memory, reasoning, and processing speed. ResultsHigher pulse pressure was associated with faster global cognitive decline (b= -0.003, 95% CI [-0.004, -0.001]) after controlling for demographics, cognitive training status, and attrition. This effect was consistent for the memory and reasoning domains. The effects remained significant after adjusting for blood pressure status, with pulse pressure demonstrating complementary predictive utility to blood pressure. Specifically, the negative effect of pulse pressure on global cognitive decline was observed only among participants with elevated blood pressure (b = -0.005, 95% CI [-0.005, -0.002]), not in those with normal blood pressure. This pattern was consistent across the three cognitive domains. ConclusionsPulse pressure is associated with accelerated cognitive decline among older adults, but this relationship is moderated by blood pressure status. Pulse pressure monitoring could improve cognitive risk assessment in older adults with elevated blood pressure. This underscores the importance of managing blood pressure to mitigate the risk of cognitive decline associated with increased pulse pressure.

Published in The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.