The effect of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation on weight loss and cognitive function in overweight or obese individuals on weight-loss diet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Objective: omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are important nutrients that play role in obesity, body lipids, inflammation, and neural function. There is controversy in studies on the effect of omega-3 PUFA supplementation on weight loss and cognitive function. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of omega-3 PUFA supplementation on weight loss and cognitive function in obese or overweight adults on a weight loss diet. Methods: 40 adult volunteers aged 30-60 years, with body mass index (BMI) between 27.0 and 35.0 kg/m2, were randomly allocated into two groups. All subjects were involved in a weight loss diet program. The subjects in the omega-3 group (n = 20) also received daily supplementation with 1020 mg of omega-3 PUFAs (580 mg eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), 390 mg docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), 50 mg other omega-3 PUFAs) for 12 weeks. Anthropometric measurements and body composition analysis were obtained at onset and at weeks 4, 8, and 12 of the study. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) test was used for evaluating cognitive functions at diet onset and at the end of week 12. Results: significant decreases were observed in weight, waist, and BMI in both groups. Abdominal fat mass and percentage decreased more in the omega-3 group than in the control group (p ≤ 0.05). MoCA scores increased in both groups within time, without statistical significance between groups. Conclusion: omega-3 PUFA supplementation augmented the reduction of abdominal fat mass and percentage in overweight or obese individuals on a weight loss diet. Further studies are required to identify the relationship and mechanisms of action of omega-3 PUFA supplementation on cognitive performance and weight loss.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".