| Title |
Complex antioxidants in a randomized single-blinded study of memory in seniors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research, July 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s40520-017-0788-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
William K. Summers, Roy L. Martin, Yimeng Liu, Bernice Peña, Gary M. Marsh |
| Abstract |
Oxidative injury to the brain and aging are theoretical co-causes of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Amyloid plaques and tangles are then secondary phenomenon. The preclinical state would then be 'normal' elderly. A potent complex antioxidant (antiOx) was tested against a popular one-a-day multivitamin (mV) in a randomized single blind design in 'normal' senior subjects over 6 months. Memory testing was done at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months. The generalized estimating equation (GEE) approach was used to compare the change score of NLT100 and 20WR between two groups over time. Analysis of the antiOx group (30 subjects) demonstrated significant improvement in declarative memory (change score for NLT100 at month 6 = 6.36 p < 0.0001) and working memory (change score for 20WR at month 6 = 3.23, p < 0.0001). A change-score analysis over 6 months suggests possible neurogenesis in the antiOx group. The mV group (33 subjects) had a change score of the NLT100 and 20WR on the sixth month of 2.20 and 0.32 (p = 0.07, 0.35). A complex antioxidant blend, sold as an over-the-counter (OTC) supplement, can improve memory in elder subjects. Antioxidants may be beneficial in AD and other neurodegerative diseases. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 13% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 14 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2017.
All research outputs
#4,837,286
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#380
of 1,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,921
of 324,886 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Aging Clinical and Experimental Research
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,867 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,886 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.