What are the full methods and results of the 2023 Khan et al. randomized trial of honey in older adults (J Nutr Health Aging 2023)?
Executive summary
A 2023 randomized controlled trial by Khan et al., published in the Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging and reported in secondary coverage, concluded that daily honey consumption “improves cognitive function in older adults” and reduced markers of oxidative stress [1]; however, the primary sources provided here do not include the trial’s full methods, numerical results, or statistical details, so a definitive appraisal of design, effect sizes, and internal validity cannot be completed from the material at hand [1].
1. What the headline study claim is and where that claim appears
The central claim — that honey intake improved cognition and lowered oxidative stress markers in older adults — is attributed to Khan SU et al., 2023, in J Nutr Health Aging as summarized by FoodTimes and indexed in the dataset supplied [1], and that journal explicitly prioritizes randomized interventional studies in aging and nutrition, signaling the study’s thematic fit for the journal [2].
2. What can be said about the study’s existence, authorship, and context
The study is cited repeatedly in contemporaneous reviews and popular reporting as “Honey consumption improves cognitive function in older adults: A randomized controlled trial” with authors listed as Khan SU, Anjum SI, Ansari MJ, Khan MH, Kamal S, and Rahman K in 2023 [1]; broader literature on honey and human health — including systematic reviews and clinical-trial syntheses — provides a mixed backdrop of small randomized trials, variable endpoints, and heterogeneous honey types, which is important context when situating any single-trial finding [3] [4].
3. What the supplied reporting shows about methods (and what it omits)
The available reporting identifies the study as a randomized controlled trial but does not provide detailed methods in the sources supplied: essential protocol elements such as sample size, inclusion and exclusion criteria, randomization procedure, blinding, honey type and dose, duration of intervention, cognitive tests used, comparator (placebo or alternative sugar), or statistical analysis plans are not present in the excerpts provided, meaning those crucial design features remain unknown based on the supplied material [1].
4. What the supplied reporting shows about results (and what it omits)
The summary claims cognitive improvement and reductions in oxidative stress markers for the honey group [1], but the provided sources do not include numerical outcomes, confidence intervals, p-values, effect sizes, subgroup analyses, adherence data, or adverse-event reporting, so the magnitude, robustness, clinical relevance, and safety profile of the reported effects cannot be evaluated here [1].
5. How this claim fits into the wider evidence base and competing views
Broader reviews and meta-analyses portray honey as a nutrient-rich food with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory constituents that may plausibly affect metabolic and neurological endpoints, but the human-trial evidence is heterogeneous, small, and sometimes contradictory — systematic reviews on cardiometabolic outcomes and clinical-trial overviews highlight mixed effects and call for larger, rigorously reported RCTs [4] [3]; in other words, even if Khan et al. found positive signals, the result should be weighed against an overall evidence base that is not yet definitive [4] [3].
6. Caveats, potential biases, and missing transparency
Without access to the trial report, there are unresolved questions about placebo control or comparator selection, blinding (particularly difficult with honey’s taste), intervention fidelity, outcome pre-specification, multiple comparisons, and funding or author conflicts of interest — common sources of bias in nutrition trials — and the supplied literature notes industry connections in some honey and nutrition research, which underscores the need to examine the original paper for declarations and methodology [4] [2].
7. Bottom line for readers and researchers
The supplied reporting confirms that a randomized trial by Khan et al. reported cognitive and oxidative-stress benefits of honey in older adults [1], but the full methods and quantitative results are not present in the materials provided here, preventing an evidence-grade judgment; obtaining and scrutinizing the original J Nutr Health Aging 2023 article — including protocol, raw outcomes, statistical analyses, and conflict-of-interest statements — is necessary before translating these findings into clinical guidance or public-health messaging [1] [2] [4].