NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
PurposeCardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a common diabetic complication associated with excess morbidity and mortality. CAN is also seen in conditions such as Parkinson's disease. Normative reference data for cardiovascular autonomic function are used to stratify individuals into those with and without CAN. However, reference thresholds for both cardiovascular autonomic reflex tests (CARTs) and heart rate variability (HRV) are scarce and based on small sample sizes. The aim of the study was to establish contemporary normative reference thresholds based on a large non-diabetic population free of cardiovascular disease (CVD).MethodsCardiovascular autonomic function, CARTs and 5-min HRV indices were assessed in individuals without diabetes and CVD from the Lolland-Falster Health Study (2018-2020) by applying the point-of-care device Vagus™. Age-specific normative reference thresholds were estimated by using log-transformed quantile regression models at the 5th and 10th percentile, with adjustments made for sex. Models assessing the association between age and HRV indices were further adjusted for heart rate.ResultsWe present age-specific normative reference thresholds for cardiovascular autonomic function, including CARTs and HRV, for 875 individuals (48% females) aged 15-85 years. The reference thresholds are presented for both the 5th and 10th lower percentile. Higher age was inversely associated with all outcomes. Females tended to have a higher parasympathetic drive compared to males. Pre-test conditions did not affect CARTs significantly.ConclusionsThe presented age-related normative reference thresholds for both CARTs and HRV indices based on a large Danish cohort may facilitate improved quality of research and treatment.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.