Andrea E. Zülke, Institute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health (ISAP), Medical Faculty, University of Leipzig, Philipp-Rosenthal-Str. 55, 04103 Leipzig, Germany, E-Mail:
J Prev Alzheimers Dis. 2023;10(1):69-82. doi: 10.14283/jpad.2022.80.
The number of people living with dementia worldwide is increasing rapidly. Preventive approaches constitute a promising strategy to counter the dementia epidemic, and growing numbers of lifestyle interventions are conducted around the globe. Gender differences with respect to modifiable risk factors for dementia have been reported, however, little is known about gender-specific effectiveness of lifestyle trials against cognitive decline and dementia. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess evidence on gender-specific design and effectiveness of randomized controlled trials against cognitive decline.
Systematic literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Cochrane Central and ALOIS. Studies assessing global and/or domain-specific cognitive function in older adults free from dementia were eligible for the systematic review. We assessed between-group effect sizes using random-effects meta-analysis. Methodological quality of included studies was assessed using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN)-checklist.
The systematic review and meta-analysis included 34 and 31 studies, respectively. Effects of lifestyle-interventions on global cognition were non-significant overall (g = .27; 95% CI: -.01; .56) and in male subsamples (g = -.05; 95% CI: -.55; .45), and small for female subsamples (g = .38; 95% CI: .05; .72). Small beneficial effects were found for memory (overall: g = .38; 95% CI = .17; .59). Stratified by gender, significant effects were observed only in women (g = .39; 95% CI = .13; .65; men: g = .37; 95% CI: .00; .73). Aspects of gender in study design and conduct were discussed in a small minority of studies. Comparable results were observed for executive function and verbal fluency. Methodological quality was deemed high in 17.6% of studies, acceptable and low quality in 52.9% and 29.4%, respectively.
We found evidence for small differences in the effectiveness of lifestyle interventions on global cognition and memory in favor of women. However, small numbers of trials 1) targeting men and 2) reporting gender-specific results for older adults with mild cognitive impairment warrant further attention. Assessing differences in modifiable risk factors for dementia in men and women and systematically addressing aspects of gender in trial conduction and recruitment in future studies might increase knowledge on gender-specific effectiveness of lifestyle trials against cognitive decline.
全球范围内患有痴呆症的人数正在迅速增加。预防方法是应对痴呆症流行的一种很有前途的策略,世界各地正在进行越来越多的生活方式干预。已经报道了与痴呆症相关的可改变风险因素方面的性别差异,但是,关于针对认知能力下降和痴呆症的生活方式试验的性别特异性效果知之甚少。进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估针对认知能力下降的随机对照试验的性别特异性设计和有效性的证据。
在 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、Web of Science、Cochrane Central 和 ALOIS 中进行了系统的文献检索。符合条件的研究是评估无痴呆症的老年人的整体和/或特定领域认知功能的研究。我们使用随机效应荟萃分析评估了组间效应大小。使用苏格兰校际指南网络(SIGN)检查表评估了纳入研究的方法学质量。
系统综述和荟萃分析分别纳入了 34 项和 31 项研究。总体而言,生活方式干预对全球认知的影响没有统计学意义(g =.27;95%CI:-.01;.56),男性亚组(g = -.05;95%CI:-.55;.45)也是如此,而女性亚组则较小(g =.38;95%CI:.05;.72)。对记忆的小有益影响(总体:g =.38;95%CI =.17;.59)。按性别分层,仅在女性中观察到显著效果(g =.39;95%CI =.13;.65;男性:g =.37;95%CI =.00;.73)。研究设计和实施中的性别方面在少数研究中进行了讨论。在执行功能和语言流畅性方面也观察到了类似的结果。17.6%的研究被认为具有较高的方法学质量,52.9%和 29.4%的研究分别被认为具有可接受的和较低的质量。
我们发现,生活方式干预对全球认知和记忆力的有效性存在微小差异,对女性有利。但是,针对男性的试验数量较少,并且针对轻度认知障碍的老年人报告性别特异性结果的试验数量较少,因此需要进一步关注。在未来的研究中,评估男性和女性痴呆症相关可改变风险因素的差异,并系统地解决试验进行和招募中的性别方面的问题,可能会增加有关生活方式试验对认知能力下降的性别特异性效果的知识。