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.

59/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 59 out of 100. Prevention trials

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Introduction Cognitive resilience (CR) can be defined as the continuum of better through worse than expected cognition, given the degree of neuropathology. The relation of healthy diet patterns to CR remains to be elucidated. Methods Using longitudinal cognitive data and post mortem neuropathology from 578 deceased older adults, we examined associations between the Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay (MIND) diet at baseline and two standardized CR measures reflecting higher cognitive levels over time (CR Level ¯ $_{\overline {{\rm{Level}}}} $ ), and slower decline (CR Slope ), than expected given neuropathology. Results Compared to individuals in the lowest tertile of MIND score, those in the top tertile had higher CR Level ¯ $_{\overline {{\rm{Level}}}} $ (mean difference [MD] = 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.14, 0.55) and CR Slope (MD = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.05, 0.48), after multivariable adjustment. Overall MIND score was more strongly related to CR than the individual food components. Discussion The MIND diet is associated with both higher cognition and slower rates of cognitive decline, after controlling for neuropathology, indicating the MIND diet may be important to cognitive resilience.

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

APA 7th

Wagner, M., Agarwal, P., Leurgans, S. E., Bennett, D. A., Schneider, J. A., Capuano, A. W., et al. (2023). The association of MIND diet with cognitive resilience to neuropathologies. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12982

Vancouver

Wagner M, Agarwal P, Leurgans SE, Bennett DA, Schneider JA, Capuano AW, et al. The association of MIND diet with cognitive resilience to neuropathologies. Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association. 2023. doi:10.1002/alz.12982. PMID: 36855023.

BibTeX

@article{wagner2023-36855023,
  author  = {Wagner, M. and Agarwal, P. and Leurgans, S. E. and Bennett, D. A. and Schneider, J. A. and Capuano, A. W. and Grodstein, F.},
  title   = {{The association of MIND diet with cognitive resilience to neuropathologies}},
  journal = {Alzheimer's \& dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association},
  year    = {2023},
  doi     = {10.1002/alz.12982},
  pmid    = {36855023},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.12982}
}

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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record gives no participant count. Look for one in the original before trusting a pattern.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. 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

Results Compared to individuals in the lowest tertile of MIND score, those in the top tertile had higher CR Level ¯ $_{\overline {{\rm{Level}}}} $ (mean difference [MD] = 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.14, 0.55) and CR Slope (MD = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.05, 0.48), after multivariable adjustment.
Overall MIND score was more strongly related to CR than the individual food components.
Discussion The MIND diet is associated with both higher cognition and slower rates of cognitive decline, after controlling for neuropathology, indicating the MIND diet may be important to cognitive resilience.

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

Study details

Study designlongitudinal study
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 59/100

Published in a leading specialty 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 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 59 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	9 / 10	Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association)
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	3 / 5	2023 — within 6 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 36855023)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	34 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 34 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 59 out of 100.
Total	59 / 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 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.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Prevention trials

See all studies in Prevention trials →