Effect of Avena sativa (Oats) on cognitive function: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Background and aim: The effect of polyphenol-rich diets or supplements on cognitive function remains a contentious topic. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of Avena sativa (oat extracts) on cognitive function among healthy adults. Methods: A structured literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus from the database's establishment until March 17, 2022. Data on cognitive function, regarding accuracy and speed of performance, were gathered from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated the acute or chronic effects of Avena sativa in healthy subjects. The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the quality of included studies. Results: We included six RCTs, of which three were crossover designs, with a total of 287 individuals. Four studies investigated the acute effect of Avena sativa, while two investigated its chronic effect. Acute ingestion of Avena sativa appeared to positively influence the accuracy and speed of performance. While short-term chronic supplementation resulted in a significant improvement in cognitive function, long-term chronic supplementation did not. Overall, the evidence was of average quality. Conclusion: Acute supplementation with Avena sativa may improve cognitive function in healthy vol-unteers. Given the small number of trials included and the disparity of the intervention dose, the con-clusions of this study should be interpreted with caution. More high-quality, long-term studies are warranted.(c) 2022 European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Automated summary

This study aimed to investigate the effects of Avena sativa (oat extracts) on cognitive function in healthy adults. Results showed that acute supplementation with Avena sativa improved cognitive function, while long-term supplementation did not. However, due to the limited number of trials and disparity in intervention doses, caution should be applied when interpreting the conclusions. Further high-quality, long-term studies are needed.