Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

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.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 71 out of 100. Prevention and risk

Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment

The search over five databases identified 898 articles, with 26 meeting the inclusion criteria. A hand search added 13 more, totaling 39 articles from 14 countries, including cohorts, cross-sectional, RCTs, and case-control studies. Most studies were conducted in the United States of America (USA), published between 2015 and 2024. Participant numbers ranged from 37 to 120,661, with follow-ups from 3 months to 24 years. Some studies explored more than one correlation. Of the studies, 14 out of 19 articles explored MIND diet adherence and global cognitive function, showing positive results. 10 out of 11 studies investigated MIND diet adherence and dementia/Alzheimer's risk, showing positive associations. 16 out of 18 articles examined the MIND diet's effect on domain-specific cognitive functions, with favorable outcomes. This systematic review reveals the significant promise of the MIND diet in enhancing cognitive health, specifically in global cognition, memory, and executive function. While observational studies strongly advocate for its inclusion in clinical guidelines to prevent and manage Alzheimer's disease (AD) and dementia, results from RCTs are mixed, suggesting further investigation is needed. The use of PRISMA and SWiM guidelines ensures robust and transparent findings, categorizing cognitive outcomes into critical areas for a holistic insight. Despite the effectiveness of alternative methods, such as MIND diet questionnaires, for adherence assessment apart from FFQ, variability in study populations, interventions, and scoring methods complicates pinpointing an optimal MIND score. This underscores the importance of standardized methodologies to refine dietary recommendations and consolidate the diet's cognitive health benefits across various populations.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 71/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 7 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 12 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 4 of 5; Sample size 0 of 4; Effect reported 0 of 3; Studied in people 0 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read left out, no data. 40 of the 56 points it could be judged on, which is 71 of 100. Total 71 of 100.40 of the 56 points we could judge = 71 of 100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a systematic review of all the studies on the question. Scored zero for sample size, effect reported and studied in people 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, multi-centre collaboration and free to read, so those were left out: it earned 40 of the 56 points we could judge it on, which is 71 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 7 / 10 Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The journal of nutrition, health & aging)
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 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)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 A review of other studies — randomisation 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
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 40644764)
Free to read — / 2 Access not recorded — left out of this score
Points 40 / 56 Scored on 10 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 40 of the 56 points we could judge it on is 71 out of 100.
Total 71 / 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.

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

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.

APA 7th

Tse, J. H. W., Law, Q. P. S., Tsang, J. T. Y., Suen, L. K. P., Tyrovolas, S., & Kwan, R. Y. C. (2025). The association between the MIND diet and cognitive health in middle-aged and older adults: A systematic review. The journal of nutrition, health & aging. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnha.2025.100630

Vancouver

Tse JHW, Law QPS, Tsang JTY, Suen LKP, Tyrovolas S, Kwan RYC. The association between the MIND diet and cognitive health in middle-aged and older adults: A systematic review. The journal of nutrition, health & aging. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.jnha.2025.100630. PMID: 40644764.

BibTeX

@article{tse2025-40644764,
  author  = {Tse, Jenny Hiu Wai and Law, Queenie Pui Sze and Tsang, Jenny Tsun Yee and Suen, Lorna Kwai Ping and Tyrovolas, Stefanos and Kwan, Rick Yiu Cho},
  title   = {{The association between the MIND diet and cognitive health in middle-aged and older adults: A systematic review}},
  journal = {The journal of nutrition, health \& aging},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1016/j.jnha.2025.100630},
  pmid    = {40644764},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnha.2025.100630}
}

Related studies in Prevention and risk

Also tagged “metabolic-syndrome”

304 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 304 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Prevention and risk

See all studies in Prevention and risk →