Openly accessible

Self-reported diet quality differentiates nutrient intake, blood nutrient status, mood, and cognition: implications for identifying nutritional neurocognitive risk factors in middle age

Young, Lauren M, Gauci, Sarah, Scholey, Andrew, White, David J, Lassemillante, Annie-Claude, Meyer, Denny and Pipingas, Andrew 2020, Self-reported diet quality differentiates nutrient intake, blood nutrient status, mood, and cognition: implications for identifying nutritional neurocognitive risk factors in middle age, Nutrients, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 1-20, doi: 10.3390/nu12102964.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Self-reported diet quality differentiates nutrient intake, blood nutrient status, mood, and cognition: implications for identifying nutritional neurocognitive risk factors in middle age
Author(s) Young, Lauren MORCID iD for Young, Lauren M orcid.org/0000-0002-2020-0400
Gauci, Sarah
Scholey, Andrew
White, David J
Lassemillante, Annie-Claude
Meyer, Denny
Pipingas, Andrew
Journal name Nutrients
Volume number 12
Issue number 10
Article ID 2964
Start page 1
End page 20
Total pages 20
Publisher MDPI
Place of publication Basel, Switzerland
Publication date 2020-10
ISSN 2072-6643
2072-6643
Keyword(s) Science & Technology
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Nutrition & Dietetics
diet quality
nutritional risk
nutrient intake
nutrient status
cognition
mood
stress
diet screening
middle-aged adults
Summary Evidence for diet quality representing a modifiable risk factor for age-related cognitive decline and mood disturbances has typically come from retrospective, cross-sectional analyses. Here a diet screening tool (DST) was used to categorize healthy middle-aged volunteers (n = 141, 40–65 years) into “optimal” or “sub-optimal” diet groups to investigate cross-sectional associations between diet quality, cognitive function, and mood. The DST distinguished levels of nutrient intake as assessed by Automated Self-Administered 24-h dietary recall and nutrient status, as assessed by blood biomarker measures. Compared with the “sub-optimal” group, the “optimal” diet group showed significantly higher intake of vitamin E (p = 0.007), magnesium (p = 0.001), zinc (p = 0.043) and fiber (p = 0.015), higher circulating levels of vitamin B6 (p = 0.030) and red blood cell folate (p = 0.026) and lower saturated fatty acids (p = 0.012). Regarding psychological outcomes, the “optimal” diet group had significantly better Stroop processing than those with a “sub-optimal” diet (p = 0.013). Regression analysis revealed that higher DST scores were associated with fewer mood disturbances (p = 0.002) and lower perceived stress (p = 0.031), although these differences were not significant when comparing “optimal” versus “sub-optimal” as discrete groups. This study demonstrates the potential of a 20-item diet screen to identify both nutritional and psychological status in an Australian setting.
Language eng
DOI 10.3390/nu12102964
Indigenous content off
Field of Research 0908 Food Sciences
1111 Nutrition and Dietetics
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Free to Read? Yes
Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30143757

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Health
School of Medicine
Open Access Collection
Connect to link resolver
 
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.

Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 16 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Fri, 09 Oct 2020, 13:37:17 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.