Cited by 68Dementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFolate and B Vitamins ResearchMedicinal Plants and Neuroprotection

Effect of long-term nutraceutical and dietary supplement use on cognition in the elderly: a 10-year systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Open access
D’Cunha, Nathan M., Georgousopoulou, Ekavi N., Dadigamuwage, Lakshika, Kellett, Jane, Panagiotakos, Demosthenes B., Thomas, Jackson, McKune, Andrew J., Mellor, Duane D. +1 more·2018·British Journal of Nutrition

Abstract

Nutraceuticals have generated interest as a way to mitigate the cognitive decline in older adults. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the evidence for these claims from the scientific literature in randomised, double-blinded, controlled trials (duration: ≥1 year; participants:n≥100; age(mean): ≥65 years). Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched four electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL and Web of Science) and identified twenty-five studies published between the 15·June·2006 and 14·June·2016. Interventions included B-vitamins,n-3 fatty acids, antioxidant vitamins and herbs. Of the B-vitamin studies, four found benefits to cognition with supplementation. The first of these B-vitamin studies, in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (n 266; duration=2 years), included benefit to executive function (P=0·015) and improvements in the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) among participants with baseline homocysteine above 11·3 µmol/l (P<0·001). In the same sample, the second study found cognitive benefits of B-vitamins dependent on the higher baseline plasma n-3 fatty acid status. The third B-vitamin study (n 900; duration=2 years) reported improved performance in immediate (P=0·046) and delayed recall (P=0·013), whereas the fourth study (n 856; duration=2 years) reported slower rate of cognitive decline in the MMSE (P=0·05). One study investigating DHA treatment (n 402; duration=1·5 years) revealed the slower rate of cognitive change in apoE e4 non-carriers (P=0·03). As only five included studies revealed notable benefits, presently based on the specific compounds explored here, there is not compelling evidence to support the use nutraceuticals to improve cognition in the elderly. Future long-term trials of nutraceuticals should investigate interactions with lifestyle, blood biomarkers and genetic risk factors.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0007114517003452

Cites

107 of 107 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Supplement use lacks evidence for preserving cognitive function or preventing dementia in middle-aged or older people.

    “A systematic review and a Cochrane review including RCTs of supplements (A, B, C, D, and E; calcium, zinc, copper, and multivitamins trials, n-3 fatty acids, antioxidant vitamins, and herbs) found a lack of evidence for supplement use to preserve cognitive function or prevent dementia in middle-aged (45–64 years) or older people (aged 65 years and older).148, 149”

    From Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 report of the Lancet Commission (2020) · cites this paper as [148]

    The Discussion says the reviewed trials did not provide compelling evidence for preserving memory in adults over 65, and none reported reduced progression toward MCI or dementia. This source does not establish the claim for middle-aged adults aged 45–64; its conclusion is limited to the elderly. Page numbers are not provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
D’Cunha, N. M., Georgousopoulou, E. N., Dadigamuwage, L., Kellett, J., Panagiotakos, D. B., Thomas, J., McKune, A. J., Mellor, D. D., & Naumovski, N.
Affiliations
University of Canberra (AU)
Corresponding author
Naumovski, Nenad
Venue
British Journal of Nutrition
Published
2018-01-09
Volume
119
Issue
3
Pages
280-298
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2773084604
Cited by
68
References
107
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2
FWCI
1.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
University of Canberra
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Folate and B Vitamins Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Medicinal Plants and Neuroprotection
Keywords
nutraceuticals, dietary supplements, cognitive decline, older adults, B vitamins, omega-3 fatty acids, docosahexaenoic acid, antioxidants, herbs, mild cognitive impairment, executive function, homocysteine, APOE ε4, long-term supplementation
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antioxidants, Cognition, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Vitamin B Complex, Vitamins, Fatty Acids, Omega-3, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Dietary Supplements, Plant Preparations

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review