ReviewFrontiers in nutrition2026
Docosahexaenoic acid intake and health in adults and older adults: a narrative review of disparities by country income level.
Review in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) is a long-chain omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid essential for maintaining optimal brain and cardiometabolic health across adulthood and aging. Despite its biological relevance, global evidence indicates substantial variability in DHA intake and status, largely influenced by dietary patterns, food availability, and socioeconomic conditions. This narrative review synthesized observational and interventional studies published between 2014 and 2026 that evaluated DHA intake or biomarkers in adults and older adults, emphasizing disparities according to country income level. Studies were categorized following the World Bank Gross National Income (GNI) classification and analyzed to describe intake patterns, biochemical concentrations, and their reported health associations. Important inequities were observed between countries. Populations in high-income countries (HICs) generally reported higher DHA intake and tissue concentrations, mainly due to regular fish consumption and greater access to supplementation, while evidence from middle-income countries (MICs) was scarce, heterogeneous, and based on small non-representative samples. In HICs, even moderate fish intake significantly improved DHA status, whereas in MICs, mean intakes frequently fell below 200 mg/day, a threshold commonly associated with cardiometabolic and neurocognitive benefits. Higher DHA levels were consistently linked to more favorable lipid profiles, lower triglyceride concentrations, and better cardiovascular indicators, though associations with blood pressure and mortality were inconsistent. Evidence from neurocognitive studies suggested structural and functional advantages, including larger total brain volume, improved white matter integrity, and enhanced cognitive performance, yet findings on memory and dementia outcomes remain inconclusive. Overall, this narrative review highlights global inequities in DHA intake and data availability, particularly in MICs, where national nutrition surveillance remains limited. These disparities may contribute to unequal protection against cardiovascular and neurocognitive decline. Strengthening dietary monitoring, improving access to DHA-rich or fortified foods, and promoting supplementation in vulnerable populations are key strategies to reduce inequities and support healthy aging worldwide.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.