Nutritional Supplements for Healthy Aging: A Critical Analysis Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Healthy aging is defined as survival to advanced age while retaining autonomy in activities of daily living, high societal participation, and good quality of life. Sarcopenia, insomnia, cognitive impairment, and changes in sensation can be key hinderances to healthy aging, but nutritional supplements may abate their impact. As research advances, an updated review on their efficacy on age-related conditions is warranted. Results: Sarcopenia can be mitigated through proper protein intake, supplements like creatine, and in certain situations Branched-Chain Amino Acids and Vitamin D, in adults over 65. Melatonin supplementation has moderate evidence for improving sleep, while valerian root lacks evidence. Magnesium, tart cherry, and kiwifruits have shown promising impacts on sleep in limited articles. Magnesium, Vitamin D, and B vitamin supplementation have been shown to improve cognition in those with mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease but require further study prior to recommendation. The Age-Related Eye Disease Study supplement combination is routinely recommended to reduce risk of progression to advance stages of age-related macular degeneration. Alpha-Lipoic Acid and Folate have been investigated for their roles in mitigating age-related hearing losses. Conclusions: Nutritional supplements and lifestyle changes may mitigate disabilities across multiple domains of age-related illnesses and promote healthy aging.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".