Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30770069›Full record

ArticleThe journal of sexual medicine2019

Testosterone Imposters: An Analysis of Popular Online Testosterone Boosting Supplements.

Adithya Balasubramanian, Nannan Thirumavalavan, Ashwin Srivatsav, Justin Yu, Larry I Lipshultz, Alexander W Pastuszak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The journal of sexual medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Canadian Urological Association guideline on testosterone deficiency in men: Evidence-based Q&A.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Adithya BalasubramanianBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Nannan ThirumavalavanScott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; Center for Reproductive Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Ashwin SrivatsavBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Justin YuBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Larry I LipshultzScott Department of Urology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; Center for Reproductive Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Alexander W PastuszakDepartment of Surgery-Urology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. Electronic address: alexander.pastuszak@hsc.utah.edu.

Funding

Multidisciplinary K12 Urologic Research (KURe) Career Development ProgramK12DK083014 · NIDDK · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI LAMB, DOLORES JEAN · 2008 to 2017
$6.0M
Characterization of the Role of NELL1 in the Predisposition to Peyronie's and Dupuytren's Diseases.K08DK115835 · NIDDK · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI PASTUSZAK, ALEXANDER WOJCIECH · 2018 to 2020
$490k
NIDDK NIH HHS K08 DK115835NIDDK NIH HHS K12 DK083014
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTestosterone-boosting supplements (T-Boosters) are prominently featured on Amazon.com, with numerous dedicated pages and claims that they "naturally" increase testosterone levels.

aimTo evaluate the highest rated and frequently reviewed T-Boosters on Amazon.com to facilitate patient counseling regarding marketing myths, T-Booster formulations, and evidence for efficacy and safety.

methodsThe Amazon marketplace was queried using the key words "testosterone" + "booster," with default search settings and ranking items based on relevance. The top 5 T-Boosters identified on July 22, 2018, were reviewed based on price, ratings, reviews, manufacturer details, and ingredients. Consumer reviews were categorized using core themes in the Androgen Deficiency in the Aging Male (ADAM) questionnaire as a proxy to understand T-Booster efficacy and reanalyzed after filtration of untrustworthy comments using ReviewMeta.com, a proprietary Amazon customer review analysis software.

main outcome measuresQuantitative and qualitative evaluation of T-Boosters on Amazon.com was performed.

resultsThe top 5 T-Boosters had an average ± SD of 2,761 ± 5,112 reviews and a rating of 4.56 ± 0.25 stars. 19 unique ingredients were identified across these T-Boosters, and literature review revealed 191 studies involving the 10 most common ingredients, of which 19% involved human subjects, 53% animal models, 15% in vitro studies, and 12% case reports or review articles. Among 37 human studies, 30% observed an increase in T levels, 3% a decrease, 46% no effect, and 22% were indeterminate. Analysis of top customer reviews from the first 2 pages of reviews for each supplement revealed differences in the ADAM score before and after ReviewMeta.com filtration. After filtration, there was a 91% decrease in users reporting increased libido, a 59% decrease in reports of increased energy, a 93% decrease in reports of improved strength/endurance, a 60% decrease in reports of improved erections, an elimination of reports of improved work performance, a 67% decrease in reports of improved sleep, and an 89% decrease in reports of improved sports ability. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our study can serve as a guide for providers to counsel patients about the efficacy of popular online T-Boosters as well as the prevalence of disingenuous reviews associated with these products on online marketplaces like Amazon.com. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: Strengths include the novel approach to assess consumers' perceptions and satisfaction of T-Boosters, as well as summary information that clinicians can provide patients. Limitations include selection bias, a small number of supplements analyzed, and the proprietary nature of the Amazon review analysis software.

conclusionT-Boosters are easily available online. Our investigation revealed that limited human studies have evaluated T-Boosters, resulting in no definitive findings of efficacy. In the absence of additional human studies, patients should be cautioned before considering T-Boosters, given the availability of highly effective therapies approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Balasubramanian A, Thirumavalavan N, Srivatsav A, et al. Testosterone Imposters: An Analysis of Popular Online Testosterone Boosting Supplements. J Sex Med 2019;16:203-212.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsLibidoPatient SafetyCommerceHumansInternetMalePatient Reported Outcome MeasuresSurveys and QuestionnairesTestosteroneUnited StatesTestosteroneHypogonadismInternetNutraceuticalTestosterone

Identifiers

PMID30770069
PMCPMC6407704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.