Dietary changes following a lifestyle-based intervention for dementia risk reduction – results from the AgeWell.de study
2024

Diet Changes for Reducing Dementia Risk

Sample size: 819 publication 10 minutes Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Zülke Andrea, Blotenberg Iris, Luppa Melanie, Löbner Margrit, Döhring Juliane, Williamson Martin, Kosilek Robert P., Michel Irina, Oey Anke, Brettschneider Christian, Gensichen Jochen, Czock David, Wiese Birgitt, König Hans-Helmut, Frese Thomas, Kaduszkiewicz Hanna, Hoffmann Wolfgang, Thyrian René, Riedel-Heller Steffi G.

Primary Institution: Institute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), University of Leipzig

Hypothesis

Does a multidomain lifestyle intervention improve dietary habits in older adults at risk for dementia?

Conclusion

The intervention improved participants' diets, particularly increasing fruit and vegetable consumption.

Supporting Evidence

  • The intervention improved the healthy diet score significantly.
  • Participants in the intervention group increased their fruit and vegetable consumption.
  • Control group participants showed a decrease in fruit and vegetable consumption.
  • Older age and female sex were linked to healthier diets.
  • More guided activities may enhance motivation for dietary changes.
  • Self-reported dietary intake may introduce bias.

Takeaway

Older people at risk for dementia can eat healthier by following a special program that helps them change their diet.

Methodology

Secondary analyses of a cluster-randomized trial assessing dietary changes in older adults through a multidomain intervention.

Potential Biases

Self-reporting of food intake raises the risk of social desirability bias.

Limitations

The intervention's intensity varied among participants, and self-reported dietary intake may introduce bias.

Participant Demographics

Participants were older adults (60-77 years) at increased risk for dementia, with a mean age of 69.0 years.

Statistical Information

P-Value

0.015

Confidence Interval

95% CI: 1.01, 1.11

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1007/s00394-024-03563-z

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication