ArticleBMJ open2026
Prescribing practices of healthcare professionals regarding multivitamins and mineral supplements in Pakistan: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMultivitamins and minerals (MVMs) are readily available dietary supplements that help prevent nutritional deficiencies and boost energy. This study examined the prescribing and consultation practices of healthcare professionals (HCPs) related to MVM supplements in Pakistan.
methodsThis cross-sectional study used a web-based structured questionnaire to collect data from HCPs from February 2021 to January 2022. The study link, which included a consent form and questionnaire, was circulated on social media platforms, and all individuals who provided consent and completed the forms were included in the study.
resultsA total of 524 HCPs participated in the study, with the majority being males, holding MBBS or Fellow of the College of Physicians and Surgeons qualifications, and working in urban settings. Findings revealed that HCPs prescribe MVMs for varied reasons. We assessed differences based on various factors like gender, education level, area of practice and specialty. Most of the differences observed were not statistically significant, except for a few related to area of practice and education level that were found significant. The primary conditions prompting MVM prescriptions included osteoporosis and bone pain (80% for vitamin D and calcium), fatigue and weakness (over 70% for iron) and numbness/tingling (more than half for folate and vitamin B
conclusionOur study findings highlight that the prescribing practices of MVMs by HCPs are primarily in line with the known physiological roles of these supplements. However, a few identified gaps in practices highlight the need for standardised guidelines to ensure patients' health and well-being.
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.