Home › Research › Treatments
Análisis comparativo del efecto de las dietas mediterránea, cetogénica, DASH y MIND en la prevención del alzheimer
Lucía Roiz Cruz. MLS Health & Nutrition Research, 2025-06-19
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The aim of this literature review is to examine and contrast four dietary patterns to evaluate their influence on Alzheimer's prevention. The need for this study arises from the lack of a comprehensive analysis definitively confirming the effectiveness of these diets in preventing this disease. An exhaustive literature review was conducted, including clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, online books, guidelines, etc. However, only articles from studies, clinical trials, and controlled randomized trials were used for discussion. Exclusion criteria were: publication period of 5 years, articles published in indexed journals and in databases such as PubMed, COCHRANE, or Google Scholar, with an impact factor equal to or greater than 1.5. It has been evidenced that the four diets can offer benefits in Alzheimer's prevention. However, when selecting the most effective diet in Alzheimer's prevention, it is necessary to consider different types of nutritional approaches such as engaging in physical activity to improve cognitive decline.It has been demonstrated that the four investigated diets offer significant benefits in Alzheimer's prevention. Although the MIND diet emerges as a promising strategy, combining the benefits of the Mediterranean and DASH diets. Integrating this diet with practices such as mindfulness and physical activity is important to promote long-term brain health and reduce the risk of cognitive decline, thus maximizing Alzheimer's prevention.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Cruz, L. R. (2025). Análisis comparativo del efecto de las dietas mediterránea, cetogénica, DASH y MIND en la prevención del alzheimer. MLS Health & Nutrition Research. https://doi.org/10.60134/mlshnr.v4i1.2902
Vancouver
Cruz LR. Análisis comparativo del efecto de las dietas mediterránea, cetogénica, DASH y MIND en la prevención del alzheimer. MLS Health & Nutrition Research. 2025. doi:10.60134/mlshnr.v4i1.2902.
BibTeX
@article{cruz2025-0826d547,
author = {Cruz, Lucía Roiz},
title = {{Análisis comparativo del efecto de las dietas mediterránea, cetogénica, DASH y MIND en la prevención del alzheimer}},
journal = {MLS Health \& Nutrition Research},
year = {2025},
doi = {10.60134/mlshnr.v4i1.2902},
url = {https://doi.org/10.60134/mlshnr.v4i1.2902}
}
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.
Key findings
- However, when selecting the most effective diet in Alzheimer's prevention, it is necessary to consider different types of nutritional approaches such as engaging in physical activity to improve cognitive decline.It has been demonstrated that the four investigated diets offer significant benefits in Alzheimer's prevention.
Why it matters
This literature review reports that the Mediterranean, ketogenic, DASH, and MIND diets can all offer benefits in Alzheimer's prevention, with the MIND diet described as promising because it combines features of the Mediterranean and DASH diets. The authors state that choosing the most effective diet requires considering other approaches too, such as physical activity to improve cognitive decline.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →
Study details
- Study designmeta-analysis
- Evidence strengthHigh
How this study scored 44/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record and institution's track record, so those were left out: it earned 41 of the 93 points we could judge it on, which is 44 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (MLS Health & Nutrition Research) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | MLS Health & Nutrition Research: journal h-index 1 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 12 / 12 | A meta-analysis pooling many studies |
| 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 | 4 / 5 | 2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | A review of other studies — randomization is not credited here |
| Times cited | 0 / 7 | Cited 0 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 0 / 5 | 0.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025 |
| Impact for its field and year | 0 / 6 | Cited 0.0× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 0 / 6 | No other study in this library cites it |
| Still being cited | 0 / 4 | Cited 0 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | OpenAlex's profile for last-listed author Lucía Roiz Cruz holds only 1 work(s), too few to judge a track record — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | 0 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 0 institution(s) in 0 countries — scores zero (affiliation lists can be incomplete) |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 41 / 93 | Scored on 18 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 41 of the 93 points we could judge it on is 44 out of 100. |
| Total | 44 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Treatments
Also in Treatments
190 studies in the library are filed under Treatments with no topic tag they share with another; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed tour of them. The Treatments hub.