MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393078430 · doi:10.1007/s40520-024-02718-6

Association between Mediterranean diet and dementia and Alzheimer disease: a systematic review with meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4393078430 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniele Nucci, Andrea Sommariva, Luca Mario Degoni, Giulia Gallo, Matteo Mancarella, Federica Natarelli, Antonella Savoia, Alessandro Catalini, Roberta Ferranti, F. Pregliasco, Silvana Castaldi, Vincenza Gianfredi

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Clinical and Experimental Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutritional Studies and Diet
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Milano
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisFunnel plotDementiaPublication biasMediterranean dietPopulationCohort studyMEDLINEDiseaseGerontologyInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Dementia affects 5–8% of the population aged over 65 years (~50 million worldwide). Several factors are associated with increased risk, including diet. The Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) has shown potential protective effects against several chronic diseases. Aims This systematic review with meta-analysis aim was to assess the association between adherence to the MedDiet and the risk of dementia in the elderly. Methods PRISMA-2020 guidelines were followed. PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus were searched on 17 July 2023. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale tool was used to assess the risk of bias. The protocol was pre-registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD 42023444368). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I 2 test. Publication bias was assessed by visual inspection of the funnel plot and by Egger’s regression asymmetry test. The final effect size was reported as OR or HR, depending on the study design of the included studies. Results Out of 682 records, 21 were included in the analysis. The pooled OR was 0.89 (95% CI = 0.84–0.94) based on 65,955 participants ( I 2 = 69.94). When only cohort studies were included, HR was 0.84 (95% CI = 0.76–0.94) based on 55,205 participants ( I 2 = 89.70). When only Alzheimer Disease was considered OR was 0.73 (95% CI = 0.62–0.85) based on 38,292 participants ( I 2 = 63.85). Discussion Despite the relatively low risk reduction associated with higher adherence to MedDiet among elderly, it should be considered that this population is the most affected. Conclusions Adherence to MedDiet could be an effective non-pharmacological measure to reduce the burden of dementia, even among elderly.

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)0.004
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: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.457
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.107 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations81
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging Clinical and Experimental ResearchSame topicNutritional Studies and DietFrench-language works237,207