This systematic review and network meta-analysis evaluated non-pharmacological nutritional supplements (vitamins, omega-3 fatty acids, probiotics, herbal extracts) versus placebo or no intervention in 2,451 elderly individuals with mild cognitive impairment. The primary outcome was cognitive function measured by tools such as MMSE, MoCA, or FSIQ. Secondary outcomes included BDNF, Aβ42, and Aβ40 levels.
Among all supplements, PUFA supplements showed the greatest cognitive benefit with a standardized mean difference of 0.91 (95% CI 0.21–1.61). Supplementation also significantly reduced Aβ42 levels, but effects on BDNF and Aβ40 were non-significant.
The authors note that the evidence is limited by study quality and heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was substantial (I²=96%), and sensitivity analyses demonstrated attenuated effect sizes after removing studies at high risk of bias. Adverse events were not reported.
Clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously. While PUFA supplements may offer cognitive benefits, the high heterogeneity and risk of bias in included studies limit the certainty of the evidence. High-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings before clinical recommendations can be made.
View Original Abstract ↓
BackgroundMild cognitive impairment (MCI) represents a transitional stage between normal aging and dementia, affecting a significant proportion of the elderly population. Non-pharmacological nutritional supplements, such as vitamins, omega-3 fatty acids, probiotics, and herbal extracts, have been proposed as potential interventions to mitigate cognitive decline and improve physiological biomarkers. However, evidence on their efficacy remains inconsistent.ObjectiveThis systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of various non-pharmacological nutritional supplements on cognitive function and key physiological indicators (e.g., BDNF, Aβ42, Aβ40) in elderly individuals with MCI.MethodsThis systematic review followed PRISMA-NMA guideline and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251079079). We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CNKI databases from inception to June 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing dietary supplements to placebo or no intervention. Data extraction included cognitive scores (e.g., MMSE, MoCA, FSIQ) and physiological markers. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Pairwise meta-analyses and NMA were conducted using random-effects models, with standardized mean differences (SMD) for continuous outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed via I2 statistics, and sensitivity analyses were performed to test robustness.ResultsThirteen trials involving 2,451 participants were included. PUFA supplements showed the greatest cognitive benefit (SMD 0.91; 95% CI 0.21–1.61) and ranked first according to SUCRA values. Supplementation significantly reduced Aβ42 levels, while effects on BDNF and Aβ40 were non-significant. Heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 96%), and sensitivity analyses demonstrated attenuated effect sizes after removing studies at high risk of bias.ConclusionDietary supplements may offer potential cognitive benefits in MCI, but evidence is limited by study quality and heterogeneity. High-quality RCTs are needed to confirm these findings.Systematic review registrationIdentifier CRD420251079079.