This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

88/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 88 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) is a pathology with increasing prevalence in the context of a more long-lived society and it is the first cause of dementia in western countries. It is important to investigate factors that can be protective and may influence its development, in order to act on them trying to reduce AD incidence and its progression. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effects of a higher adherence to Mediterranean diet (MD) on Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and AD. A literature search in PubMed, The Cochrane Library Plus and Scopus was conducted, selecting articles that analyzed associations between MD adherence and AD biomarkers (Volumetry assessed by MRI and betamiloide and Tau deposits by PET); cognitive performance in patients at risk or presenting MCI and AD; and incidence or progression from MCI to AD. Out of the 589 studies screened, 22 studies met eligibility criteria for the systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Finally, 11 studies were included in the meta-analysis (12,458 participants). Higher adherence to MD was associated with a significantly lower risk of MCI (RR = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.85-0.97) and lower risk of AD (RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.84-0.93). Our results enhance the importance of taking health-promoting lifestyle measures like following Mediterranean dietary patterns in order to reduce AD risk.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

García-Casares, N., Gallego Fuentes, P., MÁ, B., López-Gigosos, R., García-Rodríguez, A., & Gutiérrez-Bedmar, M. (2021). Alzheimer's Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mediterranean Diet. A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis. Journal of clinical medicine. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10204642

Vancouver

García-Casares N, Gallego Fuentes P, MÁ B, López-Gigosos R, García-Rodríguez A, Gutiérrez-Bedmar M. Alzheimer's Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mediterranean Diet. A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis. Journal of clinical medicine. 2021. doi:10.3390/jcm10204642. PMID: 34682764.

BibTeX

@article{garciacasares2021-34682764,
  author  = {García-Casares, N. and Gallego Fuentes, P. and MÁ, Barbancho and López-Gigosos, R. and García-Rodríguez, A. and Gutiérrez-Bedmar, M.},
  title   = {{Alzheimer's Disease, Mild Cognitive Impairment and Mediterranean Diet. A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis}},
  journal = {Journal of clinical medicine},
  year    = {2021},
  doi     = {10.3390/jcm10204642},
  pmid    = {34682764},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10204642}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a pooled review. It combines earlier studies, so it is only as good as the studies it pools. Check how many were included, whether they were similar enough to combine, and whether the authors report inconsistency between them.
Size: the record lists 12,458 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record reports “RR = 0.91; RR = 0.89”. A statistically significant result can still be small in daily life.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded high. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. High means the abstract mentions a randomized design, a meta-analysis or a systematic review. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Higher adherence to MD was associated with a significantly lower risk of MCI (RR = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.85-0.97) and lower risk of AD (RR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.84-0.93).
Our results enhance the importance of taking health-promoting lifestyle measures like following Mediterranean dietary patterns in order to reduce AD risk.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →

Study details

Study designsystematic review
Participants12,458
Effect sizeRR = 0.91; RR = 0.89
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 88/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 51 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 88 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Journal of clinical medicine)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	12 / 12	A systematic review of all the studies on the question
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	3 / 5	2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	4 / 4	12,458 participants
Effect reported	3 / 3	Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34682764)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	51 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 51 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 88 out of 100.
Total	88 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Prevention trials from nearby years

Also in Prevention trials

86 studies in the library are filed under Prevention trials with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Prevention trials hub.

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →