ArticleJournal of Alzheimer's disease reports
Antioxidant intake relative to established dietary recommendations and cognitive status in older adults.
Article in Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports. 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
Abstract
Background: Oxidative stress, the imbalance of prooxidants and antioxidants, has been recognized as a contributor in the development of age-related cognitive decline and Alzheimer's disease and Alzheimer's disease related dementias (AD/ADRD). Exogenous antioxidant intake may play a role in maintaining cognitive health during aging; however, few studies have examined cognitive status in relation to established antioxidant intake recommendations in older adults. Objective: This cross-sectional study investigated cognitive status differences among older adults based on adequacy of dietary antioxidant intake. Methods: Participants (n = 50, 71.5 ± 5.1 years old, 66% female) completed three-day food logs. Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) defined antioxidant adequacy for vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium (Se), while Adequate Intake determined antioxidant adequacy for manganese (Mn). The Saint Louis University Mental Status (SLUMS) examination categorized normal cognition, mild neurocognitive disorder, or dementia via 30-point scale. Results: No significant differences in mean SLUMS scores were observed between participants with adequate versus inadequate antioxidant intake; however, there were significant differences in cognitive status distribution by adequacy of vitamin C (p = 0.001), vitamin E (p = 0.024), Se (p = 0.018), Mn (p = 0.001), and all four combined (p = 0.002). A higher proportion of participants with inadequate intake had cognitive impairment. Conclusions: Antioxidant adequacy may be associated with clinically meaningful cognitive classification thresholds.
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.