Table 3 Associations between nut intake and cognitive function of older adults in the US, stratified by NAFLD risk groups, using linear regression models that also included age, sex, race, Healthy Eating Index scores, history of cardiovascular disease, history of type 2 diabetes, meeting physical activity guidelines, household size, ration of family income-to-poverty, smoking status, and education status
NAFLD Risk Categories a | |||
|---|---|---|---|
FLI<30 b n=726 | 30≤FLI<60 b n=483 | FLI≥60 b n=639 | |
CERAD Total | |||
Nuts consumption group | |||
Low vs. non-consumers | 0.10 (-0.89, 1.09) | 0.98 (-0.15, 2.10) | -0.73 (-1.81, 0.35) |
Moderate vs. non-consumers | 0.90 (-0.28, 2.08) | 0.12 3(-1.85, 2.09) | 1.84 (0.34, 3.34)* |
Met vs. non-consumers | -0.05 (-1.33, 1.23) | 1.54 (0.12, 2.96)* | 0.69 (-0.77, 2.15) |
Delayed Recall | |||
Nuts consumption group | |||
Low vs. non-consumers | -0.18 (-0.70, 0.34) | 0.25 (-0.50, 1.00) | -0.01 (-0.56, 0.54) |
Moderate vs. non-consumers | 0.25 (-0.43, 0.94) | -1.12 (-2.51, 0.28) | 1.11 (0.32, 1.91)* |
Met vs. non-consumers | -0.18 (-0.95, 0.58) | 0.39 (-0.65, 1.44) | 0.75 (-0.01, 1.51) |
Animal Fluency | |||
Nuts consumption group | |||
Low vs. non-consumers | 0.52 (-0.72, 1.75) | 1.30 (-0.02, 2.62) | 0.09 (-1.46, 1.65) |
Moderate vs. non-consumers | 1.98 (0.28, 3.70)* | 0.88 (-1.24, 3.00) | 1.54 (-0.27, 3.34) |
Met vs. non-consumers | 2.04 (0.71, 4.00)* | 1.75 (-0.41, 3.91) | 0.54 (-2.30, 3.39) |
Digit-Symbol Substitution Test | |||
Nuts consumption group | |||
Low vs. non-consumers | -0.14 (-3.54, 3.25) | 1.96 (-1.65, 5.56) | 0.28 (-2.83, 3.39) |
Moderate vs. non-consumers | 3.69 (-0.96, 8.33) | 6.94 (2.15, 11.70)* | 1.42 (-4.00, 6.84) |
Met vs. non-consumers | 2.63 (-2.18, 7.44) | 1.78 (-3.23, 6.80) | 1.24 (-3.03, 5.51) |