| Title |
The Effects of Green Tea Extract on Working Memory in Healthy Women
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The journal of nutrition, health & aging, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12603-017-0962-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Y. Liu, Alyce D. Fly, Z. Wang, J.E. Klaunig |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to examine the effects of green tea extract on working memory in healthy younger (21 - 29 y) and older (50 - 63 y) women. A single-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design was used. A university laboratory. Twenty non-smoking Caucasian women were recruited in the younger (10) and older (10) age group. Subjects received 5.4 g green tea extract (at least 45% epigallocatechin-3-gallate) or placebo (cornstarch) within a 24-hour period. Working memory was measured by reading span and N-back task paradigm. Blood sample (20 mL) was collected and measured for plasma malondialdehyde (MDA) and total antioxidant capacity (TEAC) concentration. A 24-hour recall was conducted for each treatment period to ensure similar dietary patterns. Green tea extract significantly improved reading span performance in older women, indicated by higher absolute and partial scores of reading span. No significant changes were observed in the younger group. N-back latencies and accuracies were not significantly different after green tea treatment in either age group. Plasma concentration of MDA and TEAC were not different after green tea extract in either group. Acute supplementation of decaffeinated green tea extract may enhance working memory capacity of women between 50 to 63 years of age. This study provides preliminary evidence that consumption of green tea extract may enhance the cognitive performance in older adults and thus provide potential chemopreventive benefits in this group. The mechanism should be explored in future research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 50% |
| Georgia | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 3 | 38% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 15% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 6% |
| Psychology | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 15 | 44% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 27 August 2022.
All research outputs
#1,427,670
of 25,540,105 outputs
Outputs from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#149
of 1,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,064
of 345,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The journal of nutrition, health & aging
#6
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,540,105 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 345,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.