Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23679573›Full record

ArticleJournal of dietary supplements2013

An industry perspective: dietary supplements and mortality rates in older women.

Taylor C Wallace, Douglas MacKay, Barry W Ritz, Michael McBurney, Andrew Shao, John Miller, James Brooks, Lewis Hendricks

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dietary supplements, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Taylor C WallaceCouncil for Responsible Nutrition, Washington, DC 0036-5114, USA. twallace@crnusa.org
Douglas MacKay
Barry W Ritz
Michael McBurney
Andrew Shao
John Miller
James Brooks
Lewis Hendricks

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This special article seeks to provide balance and clarity to the confusion brought about by the conclusions resulting from a recent study published in Archives of Internal Medicine by Mursu et al. (2011). An examination of three key limitations of the study provides context to why additional research is needed: (a) Nonusers were poorly defined; (b) supplement users were healthier than nonusers; and (c) the number of supplement users increased throughout the study. Although the literature is limited, other similar observational studies have also shown positive effects on the risk mortality for both multivitamins and single-nutrient supplements. Observational trials are an essential component of evidence-based nutrition but do not offer certainty because other data, such as the one generated from randomized controlled trials, are equally important in regard to the totality of evidence. The Senior Scientific Advisory Committee for the Council for Responsible Nutrition, an industry trade group, feels that the conclusions of the study by Mursu et al. (2011) are overstated and suggests that researchers analyze cohort(s) designed to specifically examine vitamin and mineral supplements free of confounding from factors, such as hormone replacement therapy, to better assess their benefits to the general population.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsWomen's HealthChronic DiseaseFemaleHumansMaleMortality

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.