TABLE 6.
Change score correlations between carotenoid status and cognitive variables in the treatment group subsample (n = 12)1
| Change (follow-up − baseline) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPOD | Skin carotenoids | Serum lutein | ||
| Change (follow-up − baseline) | Eriksen flanker task | |||
| Congruent accuracy | 0.25 (0.22) | 0.10 (0.38) | 0.45 (0.10) | |
| Congruent RT | 0.14 (0.33) | 0.07 (0.41) | 0.00 (0.50) | |
| Incongruent accuracy | 0.55 (0.03)2 | 0.09 (0.39) | −0.23 (0.24) | |
| Incongruent RT | 0.01 (0.48) | −0.02 (0.47) | −0.03 (0.47) | |
| P3 congruent mean amplitude | −0.22 (0.26) | 0.06 (0.43) | 0.16 (0.32) | |
| P3 congruent peak latency | 0.34 (0.15) | 0.49 (0.07) | 0.43 (0.09) | |
| P3 incongruent mean amplitude | 0.001 (0.50) | 0.22 (0.26) | 0.34 (0.15) | |
| P3 incongruent peak latency | 0.49 (0.06) | 0.40 (0.11) | 0.37 (0.13) | |
| Spatial reconstruction task | ||||
| Object-location binding | 0.58 (0.02)2 | −0.10 (0.67) | −0.06 (0.80) | |
| SDMT | ||||
| Score | −0.38 (0.22) | −0.21 (0.51) | −0.45 (0.17) | |
RT, reaction time; SDMT, symbol digits modality test.
1
Data presented as Pearson r (P).
2
Denotes significance at P < 0.05 (1 tailed).