Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24884570›Full record

SynthesisBMC complementary and alternative medicine2014

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the prevalence of dietary supplement use by military personnel.

Joseph J Knapik, Ryan A Steelman, Sally S Hoedebecke, Emily K Farina, Krista G Austin, Harris R Lieberman

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Prevalence of Dietary Supplement Usage in Military Aviators.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A Public Health Issue: Dietary Supplements Promoted for Brain Health and Cognitive Performance.Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) · 2020
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Adverse Effects of Nutraceuticals and Dietary Supplements.Annual review of pharmacology and toxicology · 2018
    Review
  19. Prevalence of supplement use in recreationally active Kazakhstan university students.Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2018
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph J KnapikUS Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine, Natick, MA, USA. joseph.j.knapik.ctr@mail.mil.
Ryan A Steelman
Sally S Hoedebecke
Emily K Farina
Krista G Austin
Harris R Lieberman
U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine · USOak Ridge Institute for Science and EducationBeltsville Human Nutrition Research Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough a number of studies have been conducted on the prevalence of dietary supplement (DS) use in military personnel, these investigations have not been previously summarized. This article provides a systematic literature review of this topic.

methodsLiterature databases, reference lists, and other sources were searched to find studies that quantitatively examined the prevalence of DS use in uniformed military groups. Prevalence data were summarized by gender and military service. Where there were at least two investigations, meta-analysis was performed using a random model and homogeneity of the prevalence values was assessed.

resultsThe prevalence of any DS use for Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps men was 55%, 60%, 60%, and 61%, respectively; for women corresponding values were 65%, 71%, 76%, and 71%, respectively. Prevalence of multivitamin and/or multimineral (MVM) use for Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps men was 32%, 46%, 47%, and 41%, respectively; for women corresponding values were 40%, 55%, 63%, and 53%, respectively. Use prevalence of any individual vitamin or mineral supplement for Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps men was 18%, 27%, 25%, and 24%, respectively; for women corresponding values were 29%, 36%, 40%, and 33%, respectively. Men in elite military groups (Navy Special Operations, Army Rangers, and Army Special Forces) had a use prevalence of 76% for any DS and 37% for MVM, although individual studies were not homogenous. Among Army men, Army women, and elite military men, use prevalence of Vitamin C was 15% for all three groups; for Vitamin E, use prevalence was 8%, 7%, and 9%, respectively; for sport drinks, use prevalence was 22%, 25% and 39%, respectively. Use prevalence of herbal supplements was generally low compared to vitamins, minerals, and sport drinks, ≤5% in most investigations.

conclusionsCompared to men, military women had a higher use prevalence of any DS and MVM. Army men and women tended to use DSs and MVM less than other service members. Elite military men appeared to use DSs and sport drinks more than other service members.

Indexed as

Military PersonnelDietary SupplementsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID24884570
PMCPMC4023532
OpenAlexW2048079290

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.