Effects of Rice Wine Lees on Cognitive Function in Community-Dwelling Physically Active Older Adults: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rice wine lees (RWL), a Japanese traditional fermented product, is a rich source of one-carbon metabolism-related nutrients, which may have beneficial effects on cognitive function. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the effect of the RWL on cognitive function in community-dwelling physically active older adults. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (clinical trial number: UMIN 000027158). SETTING: Community-based intervention including assessments conducted at the University of Hyogo and a public liberal arts school in Himeji City, Japan. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 35 community-dwelling older adults (68-80 years) who performed mild exercise before and during the trial were assigned to either the RWL (n=17) or the placebo group (n=18). INTERVENTION: Daily consumption of 50 g RWL powder, which contained one-carbon metabolism-related nutrients, or the placebo powder (made from soy protein and dextrin) for 12 weeks. Both supplements included equivalent amounts of energy and protein. MEASUREMENTS: Montreal Cognitive Assessment, computerized cognitive function test, and measurements of serum predictive biomarkers (transthyretin, apolipoprotein A1, and complement C3) were conducted at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: Visual selective attention and serum transthyretin significantly improved in the RWL group, whereas there was no significant change in the placebo group. No significant group difference was observed in the remaining cognitive performance tests. CONCLUSIONS: RWL supplements seem to have a few effects on cognitive function in community-dwelling physically active older adults. However, the impact was limited; therefore, further studies with sufficient sample size are warranted to elucidate this issue.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".