Effect Of Psychobiotic Supplementation On Cognitive Function In The Elderly: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aging is a natural and highly complex process that modifies different organs and systems; The relationship between the gut-brain axis has been the target of interest to prevent cognitive alterations, in this context psychobiotics may be a strategy to prevent cognitive decline. PURPOSE: To investigate the effect of psychobiotic supplementation on the cognitive function of physically active elderly. METHODS: Twenty physically active volunteers (F = 18, M = 2; Age:69.2 ± 5.77 yrs; Weight:64.5 ± 11.6 kg; Height:156 ± 5.12 cm; BMI:26.6 ± 4.41 kg/m2; METS:2940 ± 2421 kcal/week) were randomized in a double-blind controlled clinical trial. The placebo (PLA) group received capsules containing excipient, and the psychobiotic group (PSY) received capsules containing Lactobacillus Plantarum UBLP-40 (1x1010/UFC) and Bifidobacterium Breve UBBBr-01 (1x1010/UFC), intake daily for 12 weeks. The cognition was assessed by The Verbal Paired Associates (VPA), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA)c, Trail Making Test A and B test (TMT - A and TMT-B), Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-III) - Digit Span - Direct Order Subtest. Data was compared using Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Significance p ≤ 0.05. The protocol was approved by the UNIFESP Ethics Committee (#54754021.5.0000.5505.) RESULTS: ANCOVA analysis revealed that the VPA 3 easy trial of the PLA group reduced the score after 12 weeks (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7; p < 0,003) while PSY stayed stable. Regarding 3 difficult attempts, PSY improved the score compared to PLA (1.3 ± 1.16 vs. 2.8 ± 0.06; p < 0,004); About the MMSE total score, the PSY group was higher when compared to PLA (25.7 ± 2 vs. 28.3 ± 1.8; p < 0,029) after intervention; For TMT - A and B PSY group reduced the final total time when compared to baseline (A = 71.1 ± 36.9 vs. 44.5 ± 18.9; p < 0,028) (B = 148 ± 75.5 vs. 90.4 ± 26.5; p < 0,021); Digit Span subtest PSY increased the score compared to baseline (4.5 ± 1.78 vs. 6.4 ± 2.32; p < 0,017); For MoCAc the PSY group improved when compared to the control (21.6 ± 4.55 vs. 29 ± 1.33; p < 0,001) after intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Psychobiotics supplementation improves attention, short and long-term memory and may be a promising strategy for age-related cognitive decline. AFIP, CAPES (001 code) and CNPq
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".