Next Article in Journal
Potential Therapeutic Benefit of NAD+ Supplementation for Glaucoma and Age-Related Macular Degeneration
Next Article in Special Issue
The Effects of a Functional Food Breakfast on Gluco-Regulation, Cognitive Performance, Mood, and Satiety in Adults
Previous Article in Journal
What Makes a Front-of-Pack Nutritional Labelling System Effective: The Impact of Key Design Components on Food Purchases
Previous Article in Special Issue
Chemical Composition, Bioactivity and Safety Aspects of Kuding Tea—From Beverage to Herbal Extract
Open AccessReview

Moderators of the Impact of (Poly)Phenols Interventions on Psychomotor Functions and BDNF: Insights from Subgroup Analysis and Meta-Regression

1
Institute of Sport Sciences, Otto-von-Guericke University, 39104 Magdeburg, Germany
2
High Institute of Sport and Physical Education, University of Sfax, Sfax 3000, Tunisia
3
Research Laboratory: Education, Motricité, Sport et Santé, EM2S, LR19JS01, High Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax 3000, Tunisia
4
Activité Physique, Sport et Santé, UR18JS01, Observatoire National du Sport, Tunis 1003, Tunisia
5
Higher Institute of Computer Science and Multimedia of Sfax, University of Sfax, Sfax 3000, Tunisia
6
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), 39104 Magdeburg, Germany
7
Department of Neurology, Medical Faculty, Otto von Guericke University, 39104 Magdeburg, Germany
8
Department of Health, Exercise Science Research Center, Human Performance and Recreation, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA
9
Neurotrack Technologies, 399 Bradford St, Redwood City, CA 94063, USA
10
ASPETAR, Qatar Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Hospital, Doha PoBox 29222, Qatar
11
Laboratory “Sport Performance Optimization”, (CNMSS), ISSEP Ksar-Said, Manouba University, Manouba 1004, Tunisia
12
Interdisciplinary Laboratory in Neurosciences, Physiology and Psychology: Physical Activity, Health and Learning (LINP2-2APS), UFR STAPS, UPL, Paris Nanterre University, 92000 Nanterre, France
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Equally contributed as last authors.
Nutrients 2020, 12(9), 2872; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu12092872
Received: 11 August 2020 / Revised: 11 September 2020 / Accepted: 17 September 2020 / Published: 19 September 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Dietary (Poly)Phenols and Health)
Background: Recent anti-aging interventions have shown contradictory impacts of (poly)phenols regarding the prevention of cognitive decline and maintenance of brain function. These discrepancies have been linked to between-study differences in supplementation protocols. This subgroup analysis and meta-regression aimed to (i) examine differential effects of moderator variables related to participant characteristics and supplementation protocols and (ii) identify practical recommendations to design effective (poly)phenol supplementation protocols for future anti-aging interventions. Methods: Multiple electronic databases (Web of Science; PubMed) searched for relevant intervention published from inception to July 2019. Using the PICOS criteria, a total of 4303 records were screened. Only high-quality studies (n = 15) were included in the final analyses. Random-effects meta-analysis was used, and we calculated standard differences in means (SDM), effect size (ES), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for two sufficiently comparable items (i.e., psychomotor function and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF)). When significant heterogeneity was computed (I2 > 50%), a subgroup and meta-regression analysis were performed to examine the moderation effects of participant characteristics and supplementation protocols. Results: The reviewed studies support the beneficial effect of (poly)phenols-rich supplementation on psychomotor functions (ES = −0.677, p = 0.001) and brain plasticity (ES = 1.168, p = 0.028). Subgroup analysis revealed higher beneficial impacts of (poly)phenols (i) in younger populations compared to older (SDM = −0.89 vs. −0.47 for psychomotor performance, and 2.41 vs. 0.07 for BDNF, respectively), (ii) following an acute compared to chronic supplementation (SDM = −1.02 vs. −0.43 for psychomotor performance), and (iii) using a phenolic compound with medium compared to low bioavailability rates (SDM = −0.76 vs. −0.68 for psychomotor performance and 3.57 vs. 0.07 for DBNF, respectively). Meta-regressions revealed greater improvement in BDNF levels with lower percentages of female participants (Q = 40.15, df = 6, p < 0.001) and a skewed scatter plot toward a greater impact using higher (poly)phenols doses. Conclusion: This review suggests that age group, gender, the used phenolic compounds, their human bioavailability rate, and the supplementation dose as the primary moderator variables relating to the beneficial effects of (poly)phenol consumption on cognitive and brain function in humans. Therefore, it seems more advantageous to start anti-aging (poly)phenol interventions in adults earlier in life using medium (≈500 mg) to high doses (≈1000 mg) of phenolic compounds, with at least medium bioavailability rate (≥9%). View Full-Text
Keywords: antioxidant; aging; psychomotor functions; brain plasticity; brain functions; cognition antioxidant; aging; psychomotor functions; brain plasticity; brain functions; cognition
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Ammar, A.; Trabelsi, K.; Boukhris, O.; Bouaziz, B.; Müller, P.; Glenn, J.M.; Chamari, K.; Müller, N.; Chtourou, H.; Driss, T.; Hökelmann, A. Moderators of the Impact of (Poly)Phenols Interventions on Psychomotor Functions and BDNF: Insights from Subgroup Analysis and Meta-Regression. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2872.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop