ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Expert Perspectives on Enhancing Analytical Methods for Multi-Ingredient Dietary Supplements (MIDS): A Qualitative Study.
Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The increasing demand for multi-ingredient dietary supplements (MIDS), driven by diverse consumer health needs, has introduced analytical challenges in product testing and quality control. These challenges stem from complex ingredient interactions, formulation variability, and the diverse physicochemical properties of the individual components. To examine these issues and explore practical solutions, this study employed semi-structured focus group interviews with 33 industry professionals and 10 analytical experts from academic and industry. Professionals reported major obstacles including the degradation or loss of trace components, interferences among ingredients, analytical difficulties with specific dosage forms, and the lack of standardized testing protocols. To mitigate these challenges, professionals reported implementing various combination strategies including substituting problematic raw materials and modifying analytical instruments and pretreatment procedures, in order to improve test reproducibility. These measures were developed internally and varied significantly across companies, reflecting the absence of a unified analytical framework for MIDS testing. Building on these insights, the analytical experts proposed systematic improvements including developing matrix-specific pretreatment protocols and optimized extraction strategies as well as regulatory harmonization to enhance analytical reliability and reproducibility. These findings provide critical insights into current field practices and inform the development of standardized methodologies for the analysis and quality assurance of MIDS.
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.