Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31375101›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary and alternative medicine2019

Herbal supplements in the print media: communicating benefits and risks.

Matthew Peacock, Mihaela Badea, Flavia Bruno, Lada Timotijevic, Martina Laccisaglia, Charo Hodgkins, Monique Raats, Bernadette Egan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

8 authors.

Matthew PeacockFood, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK. m.peacock@surrey.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0937-7966
Mihaela BadeaDepartment of Fundamental, Prophylactic and Clinical Specialties, Faculty of Medicine, Transylvania University of Brasov, Bdul Eroilor Nr 29, 500039, Brasov, Romania.
Flavia BrunoCentre of Studies in Drug Communication, Department of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, Pharmaceutical Sciences, University Of Milan, Via Balzaretti 9, 20133, Milan, MI, Italy.
Lada TimotijevicFood, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.
Martina LaccisagliaCentre of Studies in Drug Communication, Department of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences, Pharmaceutical Sciences, University Of Milan, Via Balzaretti 9, 20133, Milan, MI, Italy.
Charo HodgkinsFood, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.
Monique RaatsFood, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.
Bernadette EganFood, Consumer Behaviour and Health Research Centre, School of Psychology, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford, GU2 7XH, UK.

Funding

FP7 Ideas: European Research Council 245199
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe rise in use of food supplements based on botanical ingredients (herbal supplements) is depicted as part of a trend empowering consumers to manage their day-to-day health needs, which presupposes access to clear and accurate information to make effective choices. Evidence regarding herbal supplement efficacy is extremely variable so recent regulations eliminating unsubstantiated claims about potential effects leave producers able to provide very little information about their products. Medical practitioners are rarely educated about herbal supplements and most users learn about them via word-of-mouth, allowing dangerous misconceptions to thrive, chief among them the assumption that natural products are inherently safe. Print media is prolific among the information channels still able to freely discuss herbal supplements.

methodThis study thematically analyses how 76 newspaper/magazine articles from the UK, Romania and Italy portray the potential risks and benefits of herbal supplements.

resultsMost articles referenced both risks and benefits and were factually accurate but often lacked context and impartiality. More telling was how the risks and benefits were framed in service of a chosen narrative, the paucity of authoritative information allowing journalists leeway to recontextualise herbal supplements in ways that serviced the goals and values of their specific publications and readerships.

conclusionProviding sufficient information to empower consumers should not be the responsibility of print media, instead an accessible source of objective information is required.

Indexed as

CommunicationConsumer Health InformaticsDietary SupplementsHumansItalyPeriodicals as TopicRisk AssessmentRomaniaUnited KingdomConsumer informationFood supplementsHerbal remediesPrint mediaSelf-medication

Identifiers

PMID31375101
PMCPMC6679444

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.