ReviewAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2018
Clinically Relevant Herb-Micronutrient Interactions: When Botanicals, Minerals, and Vitamins Collide.
Review in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Framework for Developing Intake and Use Guidance for Dietary Supplement Bioactives.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Optimisation of Micronutrient Supplementation During Pregnancy: Interactions Between Bioactive Compounds, Their Impact on Health, and Regulatory Considerations.Biomolecules · 2026Review
- Antiproliferative and Anti-Inflammatory Effects of the Polyphenols Phloretin and Balsacone C in a Coculture of T Cells and Psoriatic Keratinocytes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Current update on herbal sources of antithrombotic activity-a comprehensive review.The Egyptian journal of internal medicine · 2022Review
- Role ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Trends in use, pharmacology, and clinical applications of emerging herbal nutraceuticals.British journal of pharmacology · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability of certain foods to impair or augment the absorption of various vitamins and minerals has been recognized for many years. However, the contribution of botanical dietary supplements (BDSs) to altered micronutrient disposition has received little attention. Almost half of the US population uses some type of dietary supplement on a regular basis, with vitamin and mineral supplements constituting the majority of these products. BDS usage has also risen considerably over the last 2 decades, and a number of clinically relevant herb-drug interactions have been identified during this time. BDSs are formulated as concentrated plant extracts containing a plethora of unique phytochemicals not commonly found in the normal diet. Many of these uncommon phytochemicals can modulate various xenobiotic enzymes and transporters present in both the intestine and liver. Therefore, it is likely that the mechanisms underlying many herb-drug interactions can also affect micronutrient absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion. To date, very few prospective studies have attempted to characterize the prevalence and clinical relevance of herb-micronutrient interactions. Current research indicates that certain BDSs can reduce iron, folate, and ascorbate absorption, and others contribute to heavy metal intoxication. Researchers in the field of nutrition may not appreciate many of the idiosyncrasies of BDSs regarding product quality and dosage form performance. Failure to account for these eccentricities can adversely affect the outcome and interpretation of any prospective herb-micronutrient interaction study. This review highlights several clinically relevant herb-micronutrient interactions and describes several common pitfalls that often beset clinical research with BDSs.
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.