Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 5.4 2区心理学 Q1 NEUROSCIENCES Neuropsychology Review Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-07 DOI:10.1007/s11065-023-09598-z

Wen-Yin Chen, Ying-Chih Cheng, Chih-Chiang Chiu, Hsing-Cheng Liu, Ming-Chyi Huang, Yu-Kang Tu, Po-Hsiu Kuo

{"title":"Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Wen-Yin Chen, Ying-Chih Cheng, Chih-Chiang Chiu, Hsing-Cheng Liu, Ming-Chyi Huang, Yu-Kang Tu, Po-Hsiu Kuo","doi":"10.1007/s11065-023-09598-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Clinical studies examining the effects of vitamin D on cognition have reported inconsistent results. To date, no comprehensive study has examined this effect on the basis of sample characteristics or intervention model-related factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on global cognitive function and specific cognitive domains. This review was preregistered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021249908) and comprised 24 trials enrolling 7557 participants (mean age: 65.21 years; 78.54% women). The meta-analysis revealed that vitamin D significantly influenced global cognition (Hedges' g = 0.128, p = .008) but not specific cognitive domains. A subgroup analysis indicated that the effect size of vitamin D was stronger for vulnerable populations (Hedges' g = 0.414) and those with baseline vitamin D deficiency (Hedges' g = 0.480). On the basis of subgroup analyses in studies without biological flaws (Hedges' g = 0.549), we suggest that an intervention model should correct baseline vitamin D deficiency. Our results indicate that vitamin D supplementation has a small but significant positive effect on cognition in adults.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":"568-580"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09598-z","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Clinical studies examining the effects of vitamin D on cognition have reported inconsistent results. To date, no comprehensive study has examined this effect on the basis of sample characteristics or intervention model-related factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on global cognitive function and specific cognitive domains. This review was preregistered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021249908) and comprised 24 trials enrolling 7557 participants (mean age: 65.21 years; 78.54% women). The meta-analysis revealed that vitamin D significantly influenced global cognition (Hedges' g = 0.128, p = .008) but not specific cognitive domains. A subgroup analysis indicated that the effect size of vitamin D was stronger for vulnerable populations (Hedges' g = 0.414) and those with baseline vitamin D deficiency (Hedges' g = 0.480). On the basis of subgroup analyses in studies without biological flaws (Hedges' g = 0.549), we suggest that an intervention model should correct baseline vitamin D deficiency. Our results indicate that vitamin D supplementation has a small but significant positive effect on cognition in adults.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

补充维生素 D 对认知结果的影响：系统回顾与元分析》。

关于维生素 D 对认知能力影响的临床研究报告结果并不一致。迄今为止，还没有一项综合研究根据样本特征或干预模式相关因素对这种影响进行过研究。本研究对随机对照试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析，调查了补充维生素 D 对整体认知功能和特定认知领域的影响。该综述在 PROSPERO 数据库（CRD42021249908）中进行了预先登记，包括 24 项试验，共招募了 7557 名参与者（平均年龄：65.21 岁；78.54% 为女性）。荟萃分析表明，维生素 D 对整体认知有显著影响（Hedges' g = 0.128，p = .008），但对特定认知领域没有影响。亚组分析表明，维生素 D 对弱势群体（Hedges' g = 0.414）和基线维生素 D 缺乏者（Hedges' g = 0.480）的影响更大。根据无生物学缺陷研究的亚组分析（Hedges' g = 0.549），我们建议干预模式应纠正基线维生素 D 缺乏症。我们的研究结果表明，补充维生素 D 对成年人的认知能力有微小但显著的积极影响。

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分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Neuropsychology Review 医学-神经科学

CiteScore

11.00

自引率

1.70%

发文量

期刊介绍： Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.