Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37610733›Full record

ArticleJAMA cardiology2023

Health Claims and Doses of Fish Oil Supplements in the US.

Joanna N Assadourian, Eric D Peterson, Samuel A McDonald, Anand Gupta, Ann Marie Navar

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Joanna N AssadourianUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Eric D PetersonUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Samuel A McDonaldUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Anand GuptaUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
Ann Marie NavarUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: One in 5 US adults older than 60 years takes fish oil supplements often for heart health despite multiple randomized clinical trials showing no data for cardiovascular benefit for supplement-range doses. Statements on the supplement labels may influence consumer beliefs about health benefits. Objectives: To evaluate health claims made on the labels of fish oil supplements in the US, and to examine doses of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in commonly available formulations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from labels of on-market fish oil (and nonfish ω-3 fatty acid) supplements obtained from the National Institutes of Health Dietary Supplement Label Database. The study was conducted and data analyzed from February to June 2022. Main Outcome and Measures: The frequency and types of health claims made on fish oil labels (US Food and Drug Administration [FDA]-reviewed qualified health claim vs a structure/function claim) and the organ system referenced were evaluated. The total daily doses of combined EPA and DHA (EPA+DHA) were assessed for supplements from 16 leading manufacturers and retailers. Results: Across 2819 unique fish oil supplements, 2082 (73.9%) made at least 1 health claim. Of these, only 399 (19.2%) used an FDA-approved qualified health claim; the rest (1683 [80.8%]) made only structure/function claims (eg, "promotes heart health"). Cardiovascular health claims were the most common (1747 [62.0%]). Across 16 leading brands/manufacturers, 255 fish oil supplements were identified. Among these, substantial variability was found in the daily dose of EPA (median [IQR], 340 [135-647] mg/d), DHA (median [IQR], 270 [140-500] mg/d), and total EPA+DHA (median [IQR], 600 [300-1100] mg/d). Only 24 of 255 supplements (9.4%) evaluated contained a daily dose of 2 g or more EPA+DHA. Conclusions: Results of this cross-sectional study suggest that the majority of fish oil supplement labels make health claims, usually in the form of structure/function claims, that imply a health benefit across a variety of organ systems despite a lack of trial data showing efficacy. Significant heterogeneity exists in the daily dose of EPA+DHA in available supplements, leading to potential variability in safety and efficacy between supplements. Increasing regulation of dietary supplement labeling may be needed to prevent consumer misinformation.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic AcidFish OilsCross-Sectional StudiesFood LabelingHumansMiddle AgedUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug AdministrationDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic AcidFish Oils

Identifiers

PMID37610733
PMCPMC10448371
OpenAlexW4386083724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.