Fish oil supplementation may improve attention, working memory and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms in adults with autism spectrum disorder: a randomised crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Marine n -3 fatty acids ( n -3LCPUFA) have shown neurocognitive benefits in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), but few trials have examined effects in adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We explored, if n -3LCPUFA affect cognitive functions in adults with ASD, and if effects are modified by comorbid ADHD. In a 2 × 4 week crossover study, twenty-six participants were randomised to sequence of supplementation with fish oil (FO, 5·2 g/d n -3PUFA) and safflower oil (SO). At baseline and after each period, we measured primary outcomes: attention (d2-test) and spatial working memory (Corsi test) and secondary outcomes: flexibility (Stroop word-colour test), ADHD symptoms (Conners scales), executive functions (Behavioural Inventory of Executive Function) and social behaviour (Social Responsiveness Scale). The dropout rate was 15 %. Compliance was 94 % and correlated with whole-blood n -3LCPUFA. Corsi scores improved by ∼0·3 × sd ( P = 0·032) after FO v . SO, and the odds for d2 errors were 30 % lower ( P = 0·016), which was supported by improved Conners scores of attention ( P = 0·023). Improvement in Conners ADHD symptom score was limited to participants with ADHD (–3·5(–6·0; –1·0), n 10 v . −0·2(–2·5;2·2), n 11 without ADHD, P interaction = 0·096), who also improved their behavioural regulation index by 0·3 × sd after FO ( P interaction = 0·016). Participants without ADHD gained most in d2 test performance (OR = 0·4(0·2;0·7) v . 0·9(0·6;1·3) in those with ADHD, P interaction = 0·002), but their executive function score was exacerbated after FO (5·9(0·0,11·8), P interaction = 0·039). Our results did not show any effects on ASD symptoms, but suggest that FO may improve attention and working memory in adults with ASD and ameliorate ADHD symptoms in those with comorbid ADHD.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".