Home › Research › Prevention trials
Potential benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on cognitive health
Féart C, Samieri C, Allès B, Barberger-Gateau P.. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society, 2012-12-11
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
The purpose of this review was to update available knowledge on the relationship between adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MeDi) and cognitive decline, risk of dementia or Alzheimer's Disease (AD), and to analyse the reasons for some inconsistent results across studies. The traditional MeDi has been recognised by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation as an Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. This dietary pattern is characterised by a high consumption of plant foods (i.e. vegetables, fruits, legumes and cereals), a high intake of olive oil as the main source of fat, a moderate intake of fish, low-to-moderate intake of dairy products and low consumption of meat and poultry, with wine consumed in low-to-moderate amounts during meals. Beyond the well-known association between higher adherence to the MeDi and lower risk of mortality, in particular from CVD and cancer, new data from large epidemiological studies suggest a relationship between MeDi adherence and cognitive decline or risk of dementia. However, some inconsistent results have been found as well, even in Mediterranean countries. In this review, we analyse the reasons likely to explain these discrepancies, and propose that most of these differences are due to variations in the methodology used to assess MeDi adherence. We also discuss the possibility of residual confounding by lifestyle, that is, greater adherents to the MeDi also have a healthier lifestyle in general, which can favourably affect cognition. In conclusion, large-scale studies in various populations with common methodology are required before considering the MeDi as an optimal dietary strategy to prevent cognitive decline or dementia.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Féart, C., Samieri, C., Allès, B., & Barberger-Gateau, P. (2013). Potential benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on cognitive health. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0029665112002959
Vancouver
Féart C, Samieri C, Allès B, Barberger-Gateau P. Potential benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on cognitive health. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2013. doi:10.1017/s0029665112002959. PMID: 23228285.
BibTeX
@article{feart2013-23228285,
author = {Féart, C. and Samieri, C. and Allès, B. and Barberger-Gateau, P.},
title = {{Potential benefits of adherence to the Mediterranean diet on cognitive health}},
journal = {The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society},
year = {2013},
doi = {10.1017/s0029665112002959},
pmid = {23228285},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s0029665112002959}
}
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
- The purpose of this review was to update available knowledge on the relationship between adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MeDi) and cognitive decline, risk of dementia or Alzheimer's Disease (AD), and to analyse the reasons for some inconsistent results across studies.
- Beyond the well-known association between higher adherence to the MeDi and lower risk of mortality, in particular from CVD and cancer, new data from large epidemiological studies suggest a relationship between MeDi adherence and cognitive decline or risk of dementia.
- However, some inconsistent results have been found as well, even in Mediterranean countries.
- In conclusion, large-scale studies in various populations with common methodology are required before considering the MeDi as an optimal dietary strategy to prevent cognitive decline or dementia.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Prevention →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” 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 23228285) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 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.