ArticleCanadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie2025
A Survey Exploring People's Experiences With Lithium Bought as a Supplement: Une enquête sur l'expérience des personnes avec le lithium en supplément.
Article in Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A qualitative exploration of perspectives on taking lithium supplements.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Extending the Impact of Mood Disorder Care Through Treatment Optimization and Accessibility.Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveLithium, despite its evidence base and range of indications, is often underutilized due to safety concerns associated with high-dose prescriptions and consequent necessity for regular blood monitoring. Emerging evidence suggests its potential benefits at lower doses, especially for its pro-cognitive effects and positive safety profile. While accessible as a supplement, empirical human evidence on neuropsychiatric effects is lacking. This study aimed to provide preliminary evidence regarding the utilization and perceived effects of low-dose lithium supplements (LiS) in the community.
methodsCross-sectional, opportunistic survey of 211 participants aged ≥18 years who disclosed taking over-the-counter lithium supplements. The survey assessed sample demographics, supplement details, overall perspectives, and personal experiences related to the use of LiS.
resultsThe most common form of LiS taken was aspartate at 10 mg once per day, although lithium orotate and ionic lithium were also frequently used. The most common beliefs regarding the benefits of using lithium as a supplement concern efficacy for anxiety, but the most common improvements experienced was in the domain of cognition, closely followed by anxiety and mood. Mood was most commonly reported as the greatest improvement. Side effects and withdrawal phenomena were more prevalent than anticipated.
conclusionThis study revealed a diverse range of lithium supplements taken, in terms of dosage, formulation, frequency, and duration of intake. Anecdotal evidence highlighted prevalent perceived benefits and adverse effects. The study is, however, limited notably by its cross-sectional opportunistic design; more robust evidence, especially from controlled trials, is needed to fully establish the specific benefits and drawbacks associated with different forms and doses of accessible lithium supplements.Plain Language Summary TitleA survey exploring people's experiences with lithium bought as a supplement.
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.