Investigating the relationship between Dietary total antioxidant capacity and depression and anxiety in Iranian adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & Objective: Although several studies are available linking individual dietary antioxidants to the risk of psychological disorders, data about the association of dietary total antioxidant capacity (TAC) with depression and anxiety are scarce. This study was conducted to investigate the association between dietary TAC and odds of depression and anxiety among Iranian adults. Material & Methods: In this cross-sectional study, dietary intakes of 3297 apparently healthy adults in Isfahan province, Iran, were assessed using a validated detailed food frequency questionnaire. Dietary TAC was estimated using the ferric-reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) international databases. Depression and anxiety were assessed using a validated Persian translated version of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) questionnaire. Having the scores 0-7 in either subscales was considered as “normal” and the scores of 8 or more as the presence of depression or anxiety. Results: Overall, 28.6% (n= 943) of study participants were depressed or at the borderline level, and 13.6% (n= 448) had anxiety or were at the borderline level. After controlling for potential confounders, including dietary intakes of omega-3 fatty acids, we found that those in the top quintile of dietary TAC were 43% less likely to be depressed than those in the bottom category (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.40-0.82, Ptrend= 0.001). Regarding anxiety, there was a significant inverse association between dietary TAC and anxiety comparing extreme quintiles (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.39-0.99, Ptrend= 0.06). Conclusion: A significant inverse association between dietary TAC and odds of depression and anxiety was found among adults. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".