TABLE 4.
Studies examining the cognitive effects of breakfast composition1
| Reference | Design | Sample | Conditions | Cognitive measures and timing | Reported results |
| 19 | Randomized crossover; CHO-to-PRO ratio | Healthy; n = 15; age 26.3 y; 100% M | 1) 4:1: 8.4 g glucose, 33.7 g maltodextrin, 8.4 g rice starch, 18.9 g milk PRO, 2.1 g dried chicken, 150 mL water | Baseline, then every 15 min to 210 min | 1) Immediate benefit of high CHO on attention |
| 2) 1:1: 5.3 g glucose, 21.0 g maltodextrin, 5.3 g rice starch, 47.3 g milk PRO, 5.3 g dried chicken, 200 mL water | Choice RT, Combi test, multitask test | 2) Better choice RT over time with ratio of higher PRO or balanced PRO to CHO | |||
| 3) 1:4: 2.1 g glucose, 8.4 g maltodextrin, 2.1 g rice starch, 75.8 g milk PRO, 8.4 g dried chicken, 250 mL water | 3) Better choice RT, short-term memory, attention, and RT over time with ratio of higher PRO or balanced PRO to CHO | ||||
| 20 | Randomized crossover; glucose vs. PRO vs. fat vs. placebo | Healthy; n = 18; age 19 y; 72.2% F | 1) Placebo: 290 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 2 g aspartame | Baseline and 15 and 60 min | 1) Better immediate word recall and numeric working memory accuracy with PRO than with placebo |
| 2) Glucose: 260 mL water, 40 g glucose dextrose powder, 10 mL lemon juice | Verbal list learning with concurrent frontomotor task (fist-chop-slap), picture memory, simple RT, choice RT, digit vigilance, numeric working memory | 2) Impaired working memory with glucose compared with placebo | |||
| 3) Fat: 249 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 2 g aspartame, 16 g Pura vegetable oil | |||||
| 4) PRO: 260 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 2 g aspartame, 40 g Casilan 90% PRO powder | |||||
| 21 | Randomized crossover; varying fat and CHO content | Healthy; n = 16; age 26.1 y; 87.5% F | 1) Fasting | Baseline and 30, 90, and 150 min | No differences between conditions |
| 2) Low fat/high CHO: 18.4 g fat, 98.7 g CHO, 15.2 g PRO | Bakan test, 2-finger tapping test, free recall task, simple RT | ||||
| 3) Med fat/med CHO: 29.3 g fat, 74.8 g CHO, 13.8 g PRO | |||||
| 4) High fat/low CHO: 38.5 g fat, 56.2 g CHO, 14.5 g PRO | |||||
| 29 | Randomized crossover; PRO vs. CHO vs. fat | Healthy; n = 22; age 71.2 y; 50% F | 1) Placebo: 290 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 23.7 mg saccharin | 15 and 60 min | 1) CHO improved or tended to improve trials at 15 and 60 min in men |
| 2) CHO: 260 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 50 g glucose | Verbal list learning, paragraph recall, trail-making test, experimental attention task | 2) CHO and fat improved or tended to improve trials at 15 and 60 min in those with poor baseline | |||
| 3) PRO: 260 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 50.5 g whey PRO isolate, 23.7 mg saccharin | 3) Fat improved or tended to improve attention at 60 min | ||||
| 4) Fat: 248.9 mL water, 10 mL lemon juice, 41.1 g microlipid, 23.7 mg saccharin | 4) PRO reduced rate of forgetting on paragraph recall at 15 min | ||||
| 35 | Randomized crossover; CHO vs. PRO vs. fat | Healthy; n = 15; age 26.5 y; 100% M | 1) CHO: 10.5 g glucose, 84.2 g maltodextrin, 10.5 g rice starch, 150 mL water | Every 15 min to 180 min | 1) Fewer errors for choice RT after CHO vs. PRO |
| 2) PRO: 94.7 g milk PRO, 10.5 g dried chicken, 250 mL water | Simple and choice RT, Combi test | 2) Greater accuracy and efficiency in peripheral attention after PRO vs. CHO | |||
| 3) Fat: 15 g soybean oil, 15 g palm oil, 31.5 g double cream, 150 mL water | 3) Fat superior to PRO and CHO for both | ||||
| 41 | Nonrandomized crossover; glucose vs. PRO | Healthy; n = 20; age 22 y; 50% F | 1) Placebo: 240 mL water, 3 mg saccharin | Baseline and 60 min | Greater improvement for glucose than with PRO |
| 2) Glucose: 240 mL water, 50 g glucose | Verbal paired associates, story memory | ||||
| 3) PRO: 240 mL water, 50 g PRO | |||||
| 47 | Randomized crossover; high vs. low GI | Healthy; n = 40; age 59 y; 50% F | 1) High GI: 50 g glucose bolus | 35, 90, 120, 150, and 170 min | Controlling for GT, better selective attention (170 min) after low- than after high-GI simulation. |
| 2) Low GI: 50 g glucose sipping | Experimental oral working memory task, experimental visual selective attention task | ||||
| 48 | Randomized crossover; low sustained glucose vs. high GI | Healthy; n = 40; age 62.9 y; 70% F | 1) High GI: 125 g white wheat bread | 75, 90, 120, 135, 165, 180, 210, and 225 min | Low sustained glucose superior to high GI in selective attention late postprandial (75–225 min) |
| 2) Low sustained glucose: 179 g guar gum–enriched white wheat bread, providing 50 g available starch | Experimental oral working memory task, experimental visual selective attention task | ||||
| 49 | Parallel arms (randomized); low vs. high GI | Healthy; n = 106; age 21.1 y; 100% F | 1) Low GI: plain biscuit cereal, 68.5 g CHO, 17.6 g fat, 6.6 g PRO; GI = 42.3; 15.8 g SAG, 39.5 g RAG | 30, 90, 150, and 210 min | Better verbal memory with low-GI breakfast at 150 and 210 min |
| 2) High GI: cereal bar, 62.6 g CHO, 17.7 g fat, 7.3 g PRO; GI = 65.9; 0.1 g SAG, 42.3 g RAG | List learning | ||||
| 50 | Randomized crossover; low vs. high GI | T2DM; n = 21; age 65 y; 52.4% F | 1) Placebo: 250 mL water | 15 min | High GI worse than low GI for list learning, logical memory recall, working memory, executive function, and auditory selective attention |
| 2) Low GI: 55.8 g pasta, 37.5 g cheese, 123.8 g tomato sauce | List learning, paragraph recall, verbal paired associates, digit span, trail-making, Test of Everyday Attention | ||||
| 3) High GI: 98.6 g bread, 37.5 g cheese, 123.8 g tomato sauce | |||||
| 51 | Randomized crossover; low vs. high GL | T2DM; n = 34; age 58.6 y; 52.9% F | 1) Fasting: 438 g water | 30 and 120 min | No effects, high vs. low GI |
| 2) Low GL: 37.3 g CHO, 9.3 g fat, 20.9 g PRO, 12 GL | Visual spatial learning, visual verbal learning, Corsi block tapping, Tower of Hanoi, grooved pegboard, psychomotor test, source monitoring, paragraph recall | ||||
| 3) High GL: 75 g CHO, 0 g fat, 0 g PRO, 71 GL | |||||
| 52 | Randomized crossover; low vs. high GL | Impaired GT and T2DM; n = 99; age 38.4 y; 83.8% F | 1) Fasting: 438 g water | 30 and 120 min | No effects, high vs. low GI |
| 2) Low GL: 37.3 g CHO, 9.3 g fat, 20.9 g PRO, 12 GL | Visual verbal learning | ||||
| 3) High GL: 75 g CHO, 0 g fat, 0 g PRO, 71 GL | |||||
| 53 | Randomized crossover; low vs. high GL | Healthy and impaired GT; n = 65; age 37.6 y; 100% F | 1) Fasting: 438 g water | 30 and 120 min | Low-GL breakfast improved verbal memory impairment in those with impaired GT and high waist circumference |
| 2) Low GL: 37.3 g CHO, 9.3 g fat, 20.9 g PRO, 12 GL | Visual spatial learning, visual verbal learning, Corsi block tapping, Tower of Hanoi, grooved pegboard, psychomotor test, word recognition | ||||
| 3) High GL: 75 g CHO, 0 g fat, 0 g PRO, 71 GL | |||||
| 54 | Parallel arms (randomized); varying CHO and fiber content | Healthy; n = 168; age 20.4 y; 100% F | 1) Low CHO/low fiber: 15.10 g CHO, 1.46 g fiber, 0.34 g fat, 4.62 g PRO | 30 and 90 min | 1) Higher CHO related to faster RT at the later session; fastest with 1.5 g fiber |
| 2) Low CHO/med fiber: 14.45 g CHO, 6.09 g fiber, 0.94 g fat, 6.03 g PRO | Word list memory, rapid information processing task (vigilance), RT, and choice RT | 2) Poor GT: high CHO and fiber related to poorer verbal memory | |||
| 3) Med CHO/low fiber: 30.44 g CHO, 1.56 g fiber, 0.59 g fat, 8.83 g PRO | |||||
| 4) Med CHO/med fiber: 29.79 g CHO, 6.19 g fiber, 1.10 g fat, 10.24 g PRO | |||||
| 5) Med CHO/high fiber: 30.25 g CHO, 13.05 g fiber, 2 g fat, 12.45 g PRO | |||||
| 6) High CHO/low fiber: 49.84 g CHO, 1.44 g fiber, 0.58 g fat, 10.44 g PRO | |||||
| 7) High CHO/med fiber: 50.85 g CHO, 6.13 g fiber, 1.20 g fat, 12.01 g PRO | |||||
| 8) High CHO/high fiber: 49.65 g CHO, 12.93 g fiber, 2.08 g fat, 14.06 g PRO | |||||
| 55 | Parallel arms (randomized); varying CHO, fat, and PRO content | Healthy; n = 189; age 20.4 y; 100% F | 1) Low CHO/low fat/low PRO: 24.4 g CHO, 1.1 g fat, 1.7 g PRO, 3.3 g fiber | 30, 75, and 120 min; 1) list learning; 2) rapid information processing task (vigilance); 3) RT and choice RT |
1) In individuals with better GT, high-GL breakfast related to faster reaction times and more correct responses in vigilance task 2) In individuals with better GT, better memory was observed with low amounts of PRO |
| 2) High CHO/low fat/low PRO: 59.4 g CHO, 1.1 g fat, 1.7 g PRO, 3.3 g fiber | |||||
| 3) Low CHO/high fat/low PRO: 24.6 g CHO, 16.5 g fat, 1.7 g PRO, 3.2 g fiber | |||||
| 4) High CHO/high fat/low PRO: 59.6 g CHO, 16.5 g fat, 1.7 g PRO, 3.2 g | |||||
| 5) Low CHO/low fat/high PRO: 24.2 g CHO, 1.0 g fat, 9.8 g PRO, 3.2 g fiber | |||||
| 6) High CHO/low fat/high PRO: 59.2 g CHO, 1.0 g fat, 9.8 PRO, 3.2 g fiber | |||||
| 7) Low CHO/high fat/high PRO: 24.2 g CHO, 16.4 g fat, 9.9 g PRO, 3.2 g fiber | |||||
| 8) High CHO/high fat/high PRO: 59.4 g CHO, 16.4 g fat, 9.8 g PRO, 3.2 g fiber |
1
All results presented were significant unless a trend was noted. CHO, carbohydrate; GI, glycemic index; GL, glycemic load; GT, glucose tolerance; Med, medium; PRO, protein; RAG, rapidly available glucose; RT, reaction time; SAG, slowly available glucose; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus.