Role Of β-alanine Ingestion On Cognitive Function, Mood, And Physical Function In Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated the effects of 10-weeks of β-alanine supplementation on changes in cognitive function, mood, and physical performance in older adults. METHODS: One hundred men (n = 29) and women (n = 71) between the ages of 60 and 80 years (70.6 ± 8.7 y) volunteered to participate in this study. Participants were randomized into two groups. One group (BA) consumed 2.4 g·d-1 of sustained release β-alanine in tablet form, while the other group consumed a placebo (PL) comprised of maltodextrin. Testing occurred prior to supplementation (baseline: BL), at the midpoint of the study (MID), and at week 10 (POST). At each testing session participants completed cognitive function assessments including Montreal cognitive assessment (MOCA) and the Stroops pattern recognition test and. Several behavioral questionnaires that included the profile of mood states, geriatric depression scale, and geriatric anxiety scale. In addition, they also performed several physical function assessments that included hand grip strength and a timed sit-to-stand. RESULTS: No significant differences between groups were noted in MOCA scores (p = 0.19). However, when examining participants whose MOCA scores at BL were at or below normal (i.e., ≤26), participants in BA experienced significant improvements in MOCA scores (13.6% and 11.8%) at both MID (p = 0.009) and POST (p = 0.016), respectively, compared to PL. Regardless of BL cognitive function, no significant differences were noted in speed accuracy (p = 0.23) or reaction time (F = 0.343, p = 0.711) in the Stroops pattern recognition. However, a trend towards an improvement in BA was noted in success rate (p = 0.091). No significant differences were noted in any of the mood, depression, anxiety scores, or in any of the physical performance measures. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study indicated that significant improvements in cognitive function were noted in participants consuming BA and whose baseline cognitive function scores were at or below normal. A trend towards an improved success rate in pattern recognition was also noted for BA. Considering that participants were not participating in any physical activity program, it is not surprising that no affect was noted in any physical function assessment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".