A systematic review of diet and medication use among centenarians and near-centenarians worldwide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Centenarians represent a phenomenon of successful aging. This systematic review aimed to understand lifestyles and health practices, focusing on diet and medication use for healthy longevity in community-based adults 95 years or over. Medline, CINAHL, Scopus, and gray literature were searched from 1 January 2000 to 10 December 2022. Study quality was assessed using the Modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (mNOS). Pooled prevalence [%; 95% confidence interval] for categorical variables and pooled mean for continuous variables were estimated for demographics, weight status, lifestyle factors, medications, and health conditions. Of 3392 records screened, 34 studies were included in the review, and 71% (24/34) met the 6/8 criteria in mNOS. Centenarians/near-centenarians' ages ranged from 95 to 118 years, with 75% (71-78%) female and 78% (68-88%) living in rural areas. They had an overall healthy lifestyle: current smoking (7%; 5-9%), drinking (23%; 17-30%), normal weight (52%; 42-61%), overweight (14%; 8-20%), physical activity (23%; 20-26%), and sleep satisfaction (68%; 65-72%). Diet averaged 59.6% carbohydrate, 18.5% protein, and 29.3% fat; over 60% consumed a diverse diet, and < 20% preferred salty food, contributing to lower mortality risks and functional decline. About half used antihypertensives (49%; 14-84%) or other cardiovascular drugs (48%; 24-71%), with an average of 4.6 medications. Common health issues included impaired basic activities of daily living (54%; 33-74%), hypertension (43%; 21-65%), and dementia (41%; 23-59%). The findings of this systemic review underscore the pivotal role of dietary practice and weight management in healthcare strategies to promote healthy ageing. It also recognises rural living styles and sleep hygiene as potential factors contributing to healthy longevity.
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 | 0.006 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".