ArticleNutrients2020
Characteristics of Websites Presenting Parenteral Supplementation Services in Five European Countries: A Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Nutrients, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health Professionals' Perspectives on Commercially Available Intravenous Nutrient Therapies: A Preliminary Report.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Nutrient Therapy for the Improvement of Fatigue Symptoms.Nutrients · 2023Review
- Dietary Supplements during COVID-19 Outbreak. Results of Google Trends Analysis Supported by PLifeCOVID-19 Online Studies.Nutrients · 2020Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aimed to characterize the parenteral supplementation services in Czechia, Ireland, Italy, Poland, and the United Kingdom based on their websites. We generated a list of websites by searching Google using the term "vitamin infusion" and selected cities with 250,000 citizens from each analyzed country. All search inputs were performed using the native language. Data on the features of services, indications, contraindications, offered parenteral supplements, and social media activity were obtained. We analyzed 317 websites representing 371 active facilities. Only 6 (1.9%) facilities cited the scientific sources on parenteral supplementation, but these reference were highly biased; 17.4% did not provide information regarding their personnel, while 11.9% indicated the different contraindications. The most common indications were fatigue (62.5%), immunity enhancement (58.0%), anti-aging, and physical activity (51.5%). Approximately, 11.6% of facilities claimed that some parenteral supplements can help manage certain malignancies, while 2.2% claimed that they can help manage fertility problems. The most offered intravenous supplements were vitamins C (57.4%), B12 (47.7%), and B6 (42.3%). The parenteral supplementation market offers numerous ingredients as treatment for general health problems and serious health conditions. Many analyzed websites lacked essential information, which creates concerns for regarding the quality and reliability of the services.
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.