Effects and reporting quality of the vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with Alzheimer's disease ‒ A systematic review.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 BUSINESS
Camila Álvarez Velásquez, Mauricio Álvarez Mercado, Rosario Negrón López, Carolina Neira-Maldonado, Joaquín Salazar-Méndez, Juan-Carlos Coronado, Iván Cuyul-Vásquez, Felipe Ponce-Fuentes
{"title":"Effects and reporting quality of the vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with Alzheimer's disease ‒ A systematic review.","authors":"Camila Álvarez Velásquez, Mauricio Álvarez Mercado, Rosario Negrón López, Carolina Neira-Maldonado, Joaquín Salazar-Méndez, Juan-Carlos Coronado, Iván Cuyul-Vásquez, Felipe Ponce-Fuentes","doi":"10.20960/nh.06434","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Background: evidence supporting the effectiveness of vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is limited, and the reporting quality of existing research is often overlooked. Objectives: to a) evaluate the effectiveness of vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with AD; b) describe the characteristics of supplementation protocols; and c) assess the reporting quality of these interventions. Methods: a systematic search of seven databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to February 2026. Included studies involved vitamin supplementation for patients with AD and assessed cognitive outcomes. The risk of bias and reporting quality were evaluated. Results: seventeen RCTs (n = 2,478 participants) were included. While eight studies reported some cognitive improvements or stabilization with vitamin B3, D, E, folic acid or specialized multi-nutrient formulations, nine found no significant benefit. A high risk of bias was identified in seven studies, while only five were rated as low risk. The median TIDieR score of 10/12 indicates a good description of the vitamin supplementation protocols. Conclusions: the current evidence for vitamin supplementation in older adults with AD is inconclusive. While some protocols show potential for stabilizing or improving cognitive domains, results are compromised by methodological heterogeneity and a high risk of bias. Future research must focus on enhancing methodological quality and achieving greater homogeneity in vitamin supplementation prescription and dosing to ensure robust clinical evidence for patients with AD.</p>","PeriodicalId":19385,"journal":{"name":"Nutricion hospitalaria","volume":" ","pages":"999-1012"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutricion hospitalaria","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20960/nh.06434","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Background: evidence supporting the effectiveness of vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is limited, and the reporting quality of existing research is often overlooked. Objectives: to a) evaluate the effectiveness of vitamin supplementation on cognitive function in older adults with AD; b) describe the characteristics of supplementation protocols; and c) assess the reporting quality of these interventions. Methods: a systematic search of seven databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to February 2026. Included studies involved vitamin supplementation for patients with AD and assessed cognitive outcomes. The risk of bias and reporting quality were evaluated. Results: seventeen RCTs (n = 2,478 participants) were included. While eight studies reported some cognitive improvements or stabilization with vitamin B3, D, E, folic acid or specialized multi-nutrient formulations, nine found no significant benefit. A high risk of bias was identified in seven studies, while only five were rated as low risk. The median TIDieR score of 10/12 indicates a good description of the vitamin supplementation protocols. Conclusions: the current evidence for vitamin supplementation in older adults with AD is inconclusive. While some protocols show potential for stabilizing or improving cognitive domains, results are compromised by methodological heterogeneity and a high risk of bias. Future research must focus on enhancing methodological quality and achieving greater homogeneity in vitamin supplementation prescription and dosing to ensure robust clinical evidence for patients with AD.

维生素补充对老年阿尔茨海默病患者认知功能的影响和报告质量——系统综述。
背景:支持维生素补充对老年阿尔茨海默病(AD)认知功能有效性的证据有限,现有研究的报告质量经常被忽视。目的:a)评价补充维生素对老年AD患者认知功能的影响;B)描述补充方案的特点;c)评估这些干预措施的报告质量。方法:系统检索截至2026年2月的7个随机对照试验(rct)数据库。纳入的研究包括对AD患者补充维生素和评估认知结果。评估偏倚风险和报告质量。结果:纳入17项随机对照试验(n = 2478名受试者)。虽然有8项研究报告了维生素B3、D、E、叶酸或专门的多营养素配方对认知的改善或稳定有所帮助,但有9项研究发现没有明显的好处。在7项研究中发现了高风险偏倚,而只有5项研究被评为低风险。TIDieR的中位数得分为10/12,表明维生素补充方案的描述很好。结论:目前对老年AD患者补充维生素的证据尚无定论。虽然一些方案显示出稳定或改善认知领域的潜力,但结果受到方法学异质性和高偏倚风险的影响。未来的研究必须注重提高方法学的质量,并在维生素补充处方和剂量方面实现更大的同质性,以确保AD患者有强有力的临床证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nutricion hospitalaria
Nutricion hospitalaria 医学-营养学
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
181
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal Nutrición Hospitalaria was born following the SENPE Bulletin (1981-1983) and the SENPE journal (1984-1985). It is the official organ of expression of the Spanish Society of Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Throughout its 36 years of existence has been adapting to the rhythms and demands set by the scientific community and the trends of the editorial processes, being its most recent milestone the achievement of Impact Factor (JCR) in 2009. Its content covers the fields of the sciences of nutrition, with special emphasis on nutritional support.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书