ArticleJournal of dietary supplements2018
Variability in Potency Among Commercial Preparations of Berberine.
Article in Journal of dietary supplements, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- New perspectives for investigating muscular perfusion response after dietary supplement intake: an exploratory, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in healthy young athletes using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS).Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition · 2022Trial
- Berberine-Drug Interactions: Mechanisms, Clinical Relevance and Risk Stratification-A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Defined Natural Products as Adjunctive Therapies: Evidence-Gated Polypharmacology Across Molecular Targets, Human Exposure, Clinical Signals, and Safety Boundaries.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Natural Bioactive Compounds in Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Properties, Molecular Mechanisms, and Therapeutic Potential.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Berberine as a natural immunomodulator of B lymphocytes.Inflammopharmacology · 2025Review
- Analysis of US Marketed Artemisinin Supplements for Use in Dogs.Journal of veterinary pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Article
- Berberine potentiates liver inflammation and fibrosis in the PI*Z hAAT transgenic murine model.PloS one · 2024Article
- Review
- Analysis of Monacolins and Berberine in Food Supplements for Lipid Control: An Overview of Products Sold on the Italian Market.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Exposure to the natural alkaloid Berberine affects cardiovascular system morphogenesis and functionality during zebrafish development.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Critical Differences Between Dietary Supplement and Prescription Omega-3 Fatty Acids: A Narrative Review.Advances in therapy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Berberine is an isoquinoline alkaloid plant extract that is widely available as a dietary supplement in the United States and has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidemia. Because of its increased use and purported pharmacological properties, potential variations in product quality could pose a barrier to berberine's safety and effectiveness in clinical practice. Thus, this study evaluated the potency of dietary supplements containing berberine available in the U.S. commercial market. Fifteen unique dietary supplements containing berberine were purchased through U.S. dietary supplement vendors. For each product, berberine was extracted from 3 unique capsules and analyzed by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Percentage content based on the product label claim was determined for each product. The average berberine content across the products was found to be 75% ± 25% of the product label claim, with product potency ranging from 33% to 100%. Nine of the 15 tested products (60%) failed to meet the potency standards of 90% to 110% of labeled content claim, as commonly required of pharmaceutical preparations by the U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention. Evaluation of the relationship between product cost and the measured potency failed to demonstrate an association between quality and cost. Variability in product quality may significantly contribute to inconsistencies in the safety and effectiveness of berberine. In addition, the quality of the berberine product cannot be inferred from its cost.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.