Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34578818›Full record

ReviewNutrients2021

Overview of Beneficial Effects of (Poly)phenol Metabolites in the Context of Neurodegenerative Diseases on Model Organisms.

Diogo Carregosa, Sara Mota, Sofia Ferreira, Beatriz Alves-Dias, Natasa Loncarevic-Vasiljkovic, Carolina Lage Crespo, Regina Menezes, Rita Teodoro, Cláudia Nunes Dos Santos

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Diogo CarregosaCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1396-3039
Sara MotaCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.
Sofia FerreiraCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.
Beatriz Alves-DiasCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-6289-2935
Natasa Loncarevic-VasiljkovicCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-8350-1390
Carolina Lage CrespoCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.
Regina MenezesCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-0552-8480
Rita TeodoroCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-0600-8842
Cláudia Nunes Dos SantosCEDOC, Chronic Diseases Research Centre, NOVA Medical School, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, Campo dos Mártires da Pátria, 1169-056 Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-5809-1924
Universidade Nova de Lisboa · PTInstituto de Biologia Experimental e Tecnológica · PTUniversity of Belgrade · RS

Funding

European Research Council 804229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rise of neurodegenerative diseases in an aging population is an increasing problem of health, social and economic consequences. Epidemiological and intervention studies have demonstrated that diets rich in (poly)phenols can have potent health benefits on cognitive decline and neurodegenerative diseases. Meanwhile, the role of gut microbiota is ever more evident in modulating the catabolism of (poly)phenols to dozens of low molecular weight (poly)phenol metabolites that have been identified in plasma and urine. These metabolites can reach circulation in higher concentrations than parent (poly)phenols and persist for longer periods of time. However, studies addressing their potential brain effects are still lacking. In this review, we will discuss different model organisms that have been used to study how low molecular weight (poly)phenol metabolites affect neuronal related mechanisms gathering critical insight on their potential to tackle the major hallmarks of neurodegeneration.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeAgedDietHumansNeurodegenerative DiseasesPolyphenolsPolyphenolsCaenorhabditis elegansDrosophilahumanmicrobiotaneurodegenerationphytochemicalsrodentsSaccharomyces cerevisiaezebrafish

Identifiers

PMID34578818
PMCPMC8464690
OpenAlexW3195578923

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.