Short-term effects of carbohydrates differing in glycemic index (GI) consumed at lunch on children's cognitive function in a randomized crossover study.
Journal
European journal of clinical nutrition
ISSN: 1476-5640
Titre abrégé: Eur J Clin Nutr
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8804070
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2020
05 2020
Historique:
received:
09
10
2019
accepted:
26
02
2020
revised:
21
02
2020
pubmed:
24
3
2020
medline:
9
6
2021
entrez:
24
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Intervention studies suggest an influence of breakfast dietary glycemic index (GI) on children's cognition. The Cognition Intervention Study Dortmund-GI-I study examined whether lunch dietary GI might have short-term effects on selected cognitive parameters. A randomized crossover study was performed at a comprehensive school on 2 test days. One hundred and eighty-nine participants (5th and 6th grade) were randomly assigned to one of the two sequences, medium-high GI (m-hGI) or high-medium GI (h-mGI), following block randomization. In the first period, one group received a dish containing hGI rice (GI: 86) ad libitum, the other mGI rice (GI: 62)-1 week later, in the second period, vice versa. Tonic alertness, task switching, and working memory updating were tested with a computerized test battery 45 min after beginning of lunch break. Treatment effects were estimated using the t test for normally distributed data or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for non-normally distributed data. The crossover approach revealed no effects of lunch dietary GI on the tested cognitive parameters in the early afternoon. However, we determined carryover effects for two parameters, and therefore analyzed only data of the first period. The reaction time of the two-back task (working memory updating) was faster (p = 0.001) and the count of commission errors in the alertness task was lower (p = 0.04) in the hGI group. No evidence of short-term effects of lunch dietary GI on cognition of schoolchildren was found. Potential positive effects on single parameters of working memory updating and tonic alertness favoring hGI rice need to be verified.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Intervention studies suggest an influence of breakfast dietary glycemic index (GI) on children's cognition. The Cognition Intervention Study Dortmund-GI-I study examined whether lunch dietary GI might have short-term effects on selected cognitive parameters.
METHODS
A randomized crossover study was performed at a comprehensive school on 2 test days. One hundred and eighty-nine participants (5th and 6th grade) were randomly assigned to one of the two sequences, medium-high GI (m-hGI) or high-medium GI (h-mGI), following block randomization. In the first period, one group received a dish containing hGI rice (GI: 86) ad libitum, the other mGI rice (GI: 62)-1 week later, in the second period, vice versa. Tonic alertness, task switching, and working memory updating were tested with a computerized test battery 45 min after beginning of lunch break. Treatment effects were estimated using the t test for normally distributed data or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test for non-normally distributed data.
RESULTS
The crossover approach revealed no effects of lunch dietary GI on the tested cognitive parameters in the early afternoon. However, we determined carryover effects for two parameters, and therefore analyzed only data of the first period. The reaction time of the two-back task (working memory updating) was faster (p = 0.001) and the count of commission errors in the alertness task was lower (p = 0.04) in the hGI group.
CONCLUSION
No evidence of short-term effects of lunch dietary GI on cognition of schoolchildren was found. Potential positive effects on single parameters of working memory updating and tonic alertness favoring hGI rice need to be verified.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32203229
doi: 10.1038/s41430-020-0600-0
pii: 10.1038/s41430-020-0600-0
pmc: PMC8626315
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dietary Carbohydrates
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
757-764Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Références
Br J Nutr. 2012 Jun;107(12):1823-32
pubmed: 22017815
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012 Oct;66(10):1166-71
pubmed: 22872029
J Nutr. 2006 Oct;136(10):2506-11
pubmed: 16988118
Adv Nutr. 2014 Mar 01;5(2):119-30
pubmed: 24618754
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2013 Feb;67(2):185-9
pubmed: 23385968
Proc Nutr Soc. 2017 Nov;76(4):466-477
pubmed: 28651658
Am J Clin Nutr. 2016 Sep;104(3):715-21
pubmed: 27465375
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010 Sep;64(9):948-57
pubmed: 20571500
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2003 Feb;166(1):86-90
pubmed: 12488949
Br J Nutr. 2016 Oct;116(7):1298-1305
pubmed: 27608921
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1999 Aug;145(4):378-85
pubmed: 10460314
Neuropsychologia. 1994 May;32(5):595-607
pubmed: 8084417
Appetite. 2007 Jul;49(1):240-4
pubmed: 17224202
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1989;61(5):313-9
pubmed: 2707868
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2015 Apr;70(4):471-9
pubmed: 25149688
Physiol Behav. 2005 Aug 7;85(5):635-45
pubmed: 16085130
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012 Sep;66(9):1039-43
pubmed: 22781020
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jan;63(1):113-20
pubmed: 17851459
Physiol Behav. 2015 Dec 1;152(Pt A):307-14
pubmed: 26427889
Br J Nutr. 2011 Nov;106(10):1552-61
pubmed: 21736777
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012 Apr;109(15):276-81
pubmed: 22567063
BMJ. 2019 Jul 31;366:l4378
pubmed: 31366597
Can J Diet Pract Res. 2013 Winter;74(4):181-8
pubmed: 24472166