Association between nutritional status and cognitive function in older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Older adults are at an increased risk for both malnutrition and cognitive decline (1,2) . However, the relationship between nutritional status and cognitive decline remains unclear, and was investigated in this study. This is a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the Capacity of Older Individuals after Nut Supplementation (COINS) study, a randomised controlled trial investigating the effect of peanut butter on functional capacity in older adults. Older adults aged 65 years and over, who were community-dwelling, generally healthy and at risk for falls (simplified fall risk screening score ≥ 2) were recruited as part of COINS study. Nutritional status was measured using the Mini Nutritional Assessment (MNA) tool (score range 0 to 30). An MNA score of ≥ 24 indicated normal nutrition status, while a MNA score of < 24 was indicative of at-risk for malnutrition. Cognitive performance was measured by the validated Montreal Cognitive Assessment MoCA (range 0 to 30), and Trail Making Tests-A and B (TMT-A, TMT-B) (as time taken to complete tasks) tools. The MoCA test further provided scores on visuospatial/executive function, naming, language, attention, abstraction, delayed recall, and orientation domains. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to investigate the association between nutritional status and cognitive function, adjusted for age, sex and BMI. A total of 118 older adults with complete data were analysed (83% females, age (mean ± SD) = 74 ± 4 years; BMI = 27.5 ± 4.2 kg/m 2 ), of which 93.2% (n = 110) were considered to have normal nutritional status, and the remaining 6.8% (n = 8) were deemed at risk of malnutrition. In terms of cognitive function status, 40.7% (n = 48) had normal cognitive function (MoCA score ≥ 26), 56.7% (n = 68) had mild cognitive impairment (MoCA score 18–25), and 1.7% (n = 2) had severe cognitive impairment (MoCA score 10–17). After adjusting for age, sex, and BMI, MNA score was positively associated with both overall MoCA scores (β (95% CI): 0.29 (0.04, 0.54), p = 0.024) and the visuospatial/executive function (β (95% CI): 0.16 (0.05, 0.28), p = 0.006), but not with other cognitive domains or TMT performance. In summary, our findings suggest that nutritional status assessed via MNA may be predictive of global cognitive function. Future studies are needed to determine if MNA could be a surrogate marker or risk factor for cognitive declines.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".