ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2025
Methods matter for dietary supplement exposure assessment: comparing prevalence, product types, and amounts of nutrients from dietary supplements in the Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in the American Association of Retired Persons cohort study.
Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 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.
- Trends and determinants of dietary supplement use and potential drug- supplement interactions in older adults: a 16-years follow-up in the Tehran lipid and glucose study.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2026Article
- A prospective association between dietary phytate intake and risk of fracture in middle-aged and older adults: a 12-Year prospective cohort study.Aging clinical and experimental research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundValid dietary supplement (DS) assessment methods are critical for nutrition research and monitoring as DS contributes substantially toward micronutrient exposures for millions of Americans. Little is known about how DS assessment tools vary in estimating the prevalence of use and micronutrient amounts from DS.
objectivesWe compared repeat collections over a year of 2 commonly used DS assessment methods: the diet history questionnaire-II (DHQII) and the automated-self-administered 24-h dietary recall (ASA24), within the longitudinal Interactive Diet and Activity Tracking in American Association of Retired Persons (IDATA) study.
methodsDS information was collected among IDATA participants (n = 795; 50-74 y) who completed 2-6 ASA24s and a second DHQII. Agreement [Kappa (κ)] at the individual level and group-level prevalence of DS use (McNemar's test) overall and by product type were compared among all participants. Mean calcium and vitamin D intakes, by source, and nutrient amounts per consumption day (i.e., dosages) from DS were compared between the DHQII and ASA24 among DS users. Calcium and vitamin D were chosen as priority nutrients, as they reflect vitamins and minerals and are ubiquitous in DS.
resultsPrevalence of DS use varied by product type [13 of 28 comparisons differed in prevalence (McNemar's test); Kappa agreement range: κ = -0.03 to 0.73)]. Mean consumption day amounts of vitamin D (but not calcium) were remarkably different as assessed by the DHQII and ASA24 (mean ± standard error): vitamin D ranged from 24 ± 2.7 to 45 ± 9.5 μg/d on the ASA24 and from 12 ± 0.3 to 14 ± 0.3 μg/d on the DHQII (P < 0.0001).
conclusionsWithin IDATA, the comparability of ASA24 and DHQII in estimating the prevalence of use of and nutrient intakes from DS fluctuates by nutrient and product type. DS approaches beyond a questionnaire may be warranted for estimating absolute nutrient amounts, and the choice of the DS assessment method depends on the nutrient/dietary component of interest.
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.