Cross-sectional study shows food group balance affects cognitive performance in adolescents, indicating diet's importance.
BACKGROUND: While associations between individual nutrients and cognitive performance are well documented, the joint influence of healthy and unhealthy food group combinations on cognition remains poorly understood. This study examined whether the balance between healthy and unhealthy food group intake is associated with cognitive performance in youth, using a multivariate, pattern-based analytical approach. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 1,296 Chilean children and adolescents (10-14 years; 50% girls). Cognitive performance was assessed using eight standardized neurocognitive tasks, and dietary intake was evaluated using the Global Food Quality Index. Linear regression models were used to explore associations between individual food groups and cognitive outcomes, with correction for multiple testing. Canonical correlation analysis (CCA) was applied to identify multivariate modes of covariation between food group intake patterns and cognitive performance. Sex-stratified analyses were exploratory. RESULTS: = .027). Cross-loadings indicated that a dietary configuration characterized by higher consumption of legumes and fish, together with lower intake of pastries, soft drinks, and fried foods, was associated with greater performance across most cognitive tasks (7 of 8), including fluid intelligence and processing speed, except for reverse memory span. No robust multivariate patterns were observed in sex-stratified analyses. CONCLUSION: The balance between healthy and unhealthy food group intake, rather than isolated food choices, is associated with cognitive performance in children and adolescents. Considering overall dietary configurations may provide a more informative framework for understanding diet-cognition relationships during this critical developmental period.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peña‐Jorquera et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: