Home › Research › Prevention trials
Mediterranean diet habits in older individuals: associations with cognitive functioning and brain volumes
Titova OE, Ax E, Brooks SJ, Sjögren P, Cederholm T, Kilander L, Kullberg J, Larsson EM et al.. Experimental gerontology, 2013-10-11
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
To examine the association between dietary habits, cognitive functioning and brain volumes in older individuals, data from 194 cognitively healthy individuals who participated in the Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors cohort were used. At age 70, participants kept diaries of their food intake for 1week. These records were used to calculate a Mediterranean diet (MeDi) score (comprising dietary habits traditionally found in Mediterranean countries, e.g. high intake of fruits and low intake of meat), with higher scores indicating more pronounced MeDi-like dietary habits. Five years later, participants' cognitive capabilities were examined by the seven minute screening (7MS) (a cognitive test battery used by clinicians to screen for dementia), and their brain volumes were measured by volumetric magnetic resonance imaging. Multivariate linear regression analyses were constructed to examine the association between the total MeDi score and cognitive functioning and brain volumes. In addition, possible associations between MeDi's eight dietary features and cognitive functioning and brain volumes were investigated. From the eight dietary features included in the MeDi score, pertaining to a low consumption of meat and meat products was linked to a better performance on the 7MS test (P=0.001) and greater total brain volume (i.e. the sum of white and gray matter, P=0.03) when controlling for potential confounders (e.g. BMI) in the analysis. Integrating all dietary features into the total MeDi score explained less variance in cognitive functioning and brain volumes than its single dietary component meat intake. These observational findings suggest that keeping to a low meat intake could prove to be an impact-driven public health policy to support healthy cognitive aging, when confirmed by longitudinal studies. Further, they suggest that the MeDi score is a construct that may mask possible associations of single MeDi features with brain health domains in elderly populations.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Titova, O. E., Ax, E., Brooks, S. J., Sjögren, P., Cederholm, T., Kilander, L., et al. (2013). Mediterranean diet habits in older individuals: associations with cognitive functioning and brain volumes. Experimental gerontology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2013.10.002
Vancouver
Titova OE, Ax E, Brooks SJ, Sjögren P, Cederholm T, Kilander L, et al. Mediterranean diet habits in older individuals: associations with cognitive functioning and brain volumes. Experimental gerontology. 2013. doi:10.1016/j.exger.2013.10.002. PMID: 24126083.
BibTeX
@article{titova2013-24126083,
author = {Titova, O. E. and Ax, E. and Brooks, S. J. and Sjögren, P. and Cederholm, T. and Kilander, L. and Kullberg, J. and Larsson, E. M. and others},
title = {{Mediterranean diet habits in older individuals: associations with cognitive functioning and brain volumes}},
journal = {Experimental gerontology},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1016/j.exger.2013.10.002},
pmid = {24126083},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2013.10.002}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- These observational findings suggest that keeping to a low meat intake could prove to be an impact-driven public health policy to support healthy cognitive aging, when confirmed by longitudinal studies.
- Further, they suggest that the MeDi score is a construct that may mask possible associations of single MeDi features with brain health domains in elderly populations.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Study designlongitudinal study
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 52/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a longitudinal study following the same people over time. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. 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 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 52 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Experimental gerontology) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 7 / 12 | A longitudinal study following the same people over time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2013 — within 20 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 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| 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 24126083) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 30 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 30 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 52 out of 100. |
| Total | 52 / 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.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Prevention trials
Also tagged “controlled”
1,116 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,116 tagged studies.