Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40135015›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Knowledge Gaps and Educational Interventions in Dietary Supplement Regulations Among Resident Physicians.

Loai Azar, Margaret Neola, Jennifer Tran, Serenity Budd

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Loai AzarInternal Medicine, Banner - University Medical Center Tucson, Tucson, USA.
Margaret NeolaNutrition, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington DC, USA.
Jennifer TranInternal Medicine, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington DC, USA.
Serenity BuddBiostatistics and Epidemiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDietary supplement usage has significantly increased in the United States, even though dietary supplements lack premarketing Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and are susceptible to adulteration and contamination. This, in addition to a historical lack of standardized educational content for physicians on dietary supplements, poses major safety concerns.

objectiveThis study aims to evaluate internal resident physicians' knowledge of dietary supplement regulations with and without the provision of educational material.

methodsA quasi-experimental quality improvement study was conducted at a community-based academic tertiary care hospital. Surveys were distributed to all residents to evaluate their knowledge of dietary supplement regulations with and without the provision of educational materials.

resultsOut of 100 possible participants, the initial survey had a 56% response rate, with a 42.8% average knowledge test score. Notably, 75% of participants correctly identified that dietary supplements do not require FDA approval before marketing. However, knowledge gaps were evident in efficacy, safety, adverse event reporting, and third-party certification awareness. There were no significant differences in knowledge based on gender, post-graduate year, or educational track. The post-intervention survey, with a 29% response rate, demonstrated significant improvements in knowledge across all tested aspects of FDA regulations, with an average test score of 75%.

conclusionThe study found a knowledge gap among resident physicians regarding FDA regulations of dietary supplements that can be addressed with short and structured educational material.

Indexed as

dietary supplementsfdainternal medicineknowledgephysiciansregulationsresidents

Identifiers

PMID40135015
PMCPMC11933722

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.