Cited by 32Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention

Blood pressure variability, dementia, and role of antihypertensive medications in older adults

Open access
Mahinrad, Simin, Bennett, David A., Sorond, Farzaneh A., Gorelick, Philip B.·2023·Alzheimer's & Dementia

Abstract

Introduction: We assessed the association between visit‐to‐visit blood pressure variability (BPV) up to 12 years and subsequent dementia risk, and tested the modifying effect of antihypertensive medications. Methods: We studied 2234 participants from two community‐based cohorts of older adults with normal cognition or mild cognitive impairment. Participants were followed through annual assessments for up to 27 years. Visit‐to‐visit BPV was quantified over 3, 6, 9, and 12 years, respectively. Results: Higher systolic BPV (SBPV) during 3, 6, 9, and 12 years was associated with a subsequent increased risk of dementia, with hazard ratios ranging from 1.02 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.04) to 1.10 (95% CI: 1.05–1.16). The association between SBPV and dementia risk was stronger among participants not taking calcium channel blockers ( p ‐for interaction < 0.05). Discussion: Among older adults, long‐term exposure to higher visit‐to‐visit SBPV is associated with an increased risk of dementia later in life, and calcium channel blockers may modify this association. Highlights: Among adults aged >65, higher systolic blood pressure variability spanning 3–12 years is associated with an increased risk of dementia later in life. Single blood pressure measurement or mean blood pressure levels does not seem to associate with dementia risk among older adults. The association between systolic blood pressure variability and dementia risk is stronger among those not taking calcium channel blocker medications.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/alz.12935

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahinrad, S., Bennett, D. A., Sorond, F. A., & Gorelick, P. B.
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Rush University Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Mahinrad, Simin
Venue
Alzheimer's & Dementia
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2023-01-19
Volume
19
Issue
7
Pages
2966-2974
ISSN
  • 1552-5260 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-5279
OpenAlex
W4317480273
Cited by
32
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14
FWCI
6.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Alzheimer s & Dementia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute on Aging (P30AG10161, P30AG72975, R01AG15819, R01AG17917)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Keywords
blood pressure variability, visit-to-visit blood pressure variability
MeSH terms
Aged, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Calcium Channel Blockers, Dementia, Humans, Hypertension, Cognitive Dysfunction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review