MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323349723 · doi:10.1186/s12916-023-02771-4

Water intake, hydration status and 2-year changes in cognitive performance: a prospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4323349723 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephanie Nishi, Nancy Babió, Indira Paz‐Graniel, Lluís Serra‐Majem, Jesús Vioqué, Montserrat Fitó, Dolores Corella, Xavier Pintó, Aurora Bueno‐Cavanillas, Josep A. Tur, Laura Díez-Ricote, J. Alfredo Martínéz, Carlos Gómez Martínez, Andrés González-Botella, Olga Castañer, Andrea Álvarez‐Sala, Cristina Montesdeoca-Mendoza, Marta Fanlo‐Maresma, Naomi Cano‐Ibáñez, Cristina Bouzas, Lidia Daimiel, M. Ángeles Zulet, John L. Sievenpiper, Kelly L. Rodriguez, Zenaida Vázquez‐Ruiz, Jordi Salas‐Salvadó

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicThermoregulation and physiological responses
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCanadian AIDS Treatment Information ExchangeSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red-Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y NutriciónInstituto de Salud Carlos IIICentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Diabetes y Enfermedades Metabólicas AsociadasCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversitat Rovira i VirgiliH2020 European Research CouncilMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsMedicineProspective cohort studyOverweightCohortPopulationCohort studyCognitionObesityInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Water intake and hydration status have been suggested to impact cognition; however, longitudinal evidence is limited and often inconsistent. This study aimed to longitudinally assess the association between hydration status and water intake based on current recommendations, with changes in cognition in an older Spanish population at high cardiovascular disease risk. METHODS: ) and metabolic syndrome from the PREDIMED-Plus study. Participants had completed bloodwork and validated, semiquantitative beverage and food frequency questionnaires at baseline, as well as an extensive neuropsychological battery of 8 validated tests at baseline and 2 years of follow-up. Hydration status was determined by serum osmolarity calculation and categorized as < 295 mmol/L (hydrated), 295-299.9 mmol/L (impending dehydration), and ≥ 300 mmol/L (dehydrated). Water intake was assessed as total drinking water intake and total water intake from food and beverages and according to EFSA recommendations. Global cognitive function was determined as a composite z-score summarizing individual participant results from all neuropsychological tests. Multivariable linear regression models were fitted to assess the associations between baseline hydration status and fluid intake, continuously and categorically, with 2-year changes in cognitive performance. RESULTS: The mean baseline daily total water intake was 2871 ± 676 mL/day (2889 ± 677 mL/day in men; 2854 ± 674 mL/day in women), and 80.2% of participants met the ESFA reference values for an adequate intake. Serum osmolarity (mean 298 ± 24 mmol/L, range 263 to 347 mmol/L) indicated that 56% of participants were physiologically dehydrated. Lower physiological hydration status (i.e., greater serum osmolarity) was associated with a greater decline in global cognitive function z-score over a 2-year period (β: - 0.010; 95% CI - 0.017 to - 0.004, p-value = 0.002). No significant associations were observed between water intake from beverages and/or foods with 2-year changes in global cognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced physiological hydration status was associated with greater reductions in global cognitive function over a 2-year period in older adults with metabolic syndrome and overweight or obesity. Future research assessing the impact of hydration on cognitive performance over a longer duration is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Registry, ISRCTN89898870. Retrospectively registered on 24 July 2014.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MedicineSame topicThermoregulation and physiological responsesFrench-language works237,207