Association of fish oil supplement use with preservation of brain volume and cognitive function
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of fish oil supplements (FOSs) is associated with concomitant reduction in cognitive decline and brain atrophy in older adults. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to examine the relationship between FOS use during the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative and indicators of cognitive decline. Older adults (229 cognitively normal individuals, 397 patients with mild cognitive impairment, and 193 patients with Alzheimer's disease) were assessed with neuropsychological tests and brain magnetic resonance imaging every 6 months. Primary outcomes included (1) global cognitive status and (2) cerebral cortex gray matter and hippocampus and ventricular volumes. RESULTS: FOS use during follow-up was associated with significantly lower mean cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale and higher Mini-Mental State Examination scores among those with normal cognition. Associations between FOS use and the outcomes were observed only in APOE ε4-negative participants. FOS use during the study was also associated with less atrophy in one or more brain regions of interest.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".