ArticleNutrition journal2025
Dietary provitamin A and non-provitamin A carotenoid in relation to cognitive function among middle-aged and older adults.
Article in Nutrition journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Sustainable Lutein Production: Sources, Technologies, and Functional Applications.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Correction: Dietary provitamin A and non-provitamin A carotenoid in relation to cognitive function among middle-aged and older adults.Nutrition journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDietary carotenoids have been associated with better cognitive function, yet evidence regarding the role of different subgroups of carotenoid is inconclusive. This study aimed to investigate the relation of specific carotenoid subgroups to cognitive function.
methodsWe conducted a prospective study among US adults aged 50 years and older based on the Health and Retirement Study from 2013 to 2020. Average daily intakes of dietary provitamin A carotenoid (α-carotene, β-carotene and β-cryptoxanthin), and non-provitamin A carotenoid (lutein-zeaxanthin and lycopene) were assessed by a 163-item semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) in 2013. In 2016, inflammatory biomarkers of major serum cytokines were assayed. Cognitive function was measured using a composite test score of global cognitive function (range 0-27) every 2 years from 2014 to 2020. Beta coefficients (β) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by linear mixed-effects models to evaluate the associations of energy-adjusted provitamin A and non-provitamin A carotenoid with cognitive function. We also performed mediation analysis to assess the potential mediating role of those serum cytokines.
resultsAmong 6015 participants (mean age of 67.8 ± 9.8 years), the median daily intake of provitamin A carotenoid and non-provitamin A carotenoid were 3.2 mg/d (IQR, 2.0-5.2) and 6.0 mg/d (IQR, 4.3-8.6), respectively. We observed a significant association between non-provitamin A carotenoid intake and cognitive function. The multi-variable adjusted mean difference in cognitive function score was 0.288 (95% CI:0.071, 0.504) comparing top to bottom quintile (median intake 12.6 mg/d vs. 3.0 mg/d) of non-provitamin A carotenoid. The corresponding association of the non-provitamin A carotenoid with cognitive function was significantly mediated by serum level of sTNFR-1 (3.97%, 95% CI:0.70-12.00, P < 0.05). No significant associations with cognitive function were observed for provitamin A carotenoid (β = 0.033, 95% CI: -0.188, 0.255) in the overall participants, however the association became significant among individuals with higher intake level of retinol (Q4 vs. Q1: β = 0.408, 95% CI: 0.099, 0.717) (P-interaction > 0.05).
conclusionsThe study demonstrated heterogeneous associations of different carotenoid subgroups with cognition in U.S. adults. Further studies are warranted to confirm the study findings and explore the potential mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.