You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial on Effects of a Vitis vinifera Extract on Cognitive Function in Healthy Older Adults
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Pharmacology, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphar.2017.00776 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gioacchino Calapai, Francesco Bonina, Andrea Bonina, Luisa Rizza, Carmen Mannucci, Vincenzo Arcoraci, Germana Laganà, Angela Alibrandi, Concetta Pollicino, Santi Inferrera, Umberto Alecci |
| Abstract |
Introduction: Gradual population aging is creating a new set of needs in the general population. Memory capacity decreases with age, and memory deficits are considered an early symptom of Alzheimer's Disease (AD), one of the most prevalent cognitive disorders in older people. Numerous studies have shown that grape polyphenolic compounds (GPs) are able to attenuate cognitive impairment and reduce brain lesions in experimental AD animal models. These GP effects are associated with improvement in brain antioxidant status and prevention of free radical-induced neuronal damage. We designed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial to investigate the potential beneficial effects of a Vitis vinifera-based dietary supplement on cognitive function and neuropsychological status in healthy older adults. Methods: One-hundred eleven subjects were recruited and randomly divided in two groups: one group received the V. vinifera-based dietary supplement Cognigrape(®) for 12 weeks (250 mg/day) and the second group received placebo over the same period of time. Before and after the end of the supplementation period, cognitive function and neuropsychological status were evaluated using the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), and Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) evaluations. Results: MMSE scores were significantly improved after supplementation with Cognigrape(®) in comparison with baseline levels (p < 0.0001) and placebo (r = 0.59, 0.95% CI 0.11, 1.22; p < 0.0001). Cognigrape(®) supplementation produced a significant reduction in BDI (-15.8%) and HARS (-24.9%) scores with respect to baseline levels (p < 0.0001) and placebo (p < 0.0001 for BDI and p < 0.05 for HARS). RBANS total score was significantly improved by Cognigrape(®) with respect to baseline levels and placebo (r = 0.55, 0.95% CI 0.48, 6.07; p < 0.0001). The comparison with the placebo revealed improvements in several parameters among participants receiving Cognigrape(®): attention (p < 0.001); language (p < 0.05); immediate memory (p < 0.0001); and delayed memory (p < 0.0001). Visuospatial/constructional abilities were not modified. During the study, no adverse effects were detected. Conclusion: The results show that 12 weeks of Cognigrape(®) supplementation is safe, can improve physiological cognitive profiles, and can concurrently ameliorate negative neuropsychological status in healthy older adults. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 116 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 13% |
| Researcher | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 44 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 12 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 10 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 22 | 19% |
| Unknown | 49 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 105. 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 02 January 2024.
All research outputs
#391,946
of 25,085,910 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#142
of 19,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,291
of 335,573 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#1
of 273 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,085,910 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,207 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 335,573 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 273 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.