Consumer Usage and Reasons for Using Dietary Supplements: Report of a Series of Surveys
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: Consumer usage of dietary supplements is prevalent in the United States, and total usage is higher than reported in recent National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), because these surveys capture usage only in the 30 days prior to the respondent's interview and do not capture occasional and seasonal use throughout the year. We report data from a series of consumer surveys on the full extent of dietary supplement use, on the reasons for supplement use, and on the products most commonly taken, as well as other health habits of supplement users. METHODS: The Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN), a trade association of the dietary supplement industry, has contracted with Ipsos Public Affairs to conduct consumer surveys annually since 2000. The surveys have been administered online since 2007 to about 2000 subjects each year. We report 5 years of data (2007 to 2011) on the prevalence of dietary supplement use, as well as more detailed data from the 2011 survey on the products used, the reasons for using supplements, and other health habits of supplement users. RESULTS: The prevalence of supplement use fluctuated within the range of 64% to 69% from 2007 to 2011, and the prevalence of regular supplement use ranged from 48% to 53%, with no statistically significant differences from year to year. Over the 5-year period, the percentage of respondents who said that they regularly used a variety of supplements increased from 28% to 36%, and the increase from 2010 to 2011 was statistically significant. The percentage of respondents who said that they regularly used only a multivitamin, as opposed to a variety of supplements, declined from 24% to 17%, and the decrease from 2007 to 2008 was statistically significant. Detailed results from the 2011 survey confirm that supplement use increases with age and is higher in women than in men. Vitamin or mineral supplements were used by 67% of all respondents in 2011, specialty supplements by 35%, botanicals by 23%, and sports supplements by 17%. Among supplement users, multivitamins were the most commonly used supplement (71%), followed by omega-3 or fish oil (33%), calcium (32%), vitamin D (32%), and vitamin C (32%). The reasons most often cited for supplement use were for overall health and wellness (58%) and to fill nutrient gaps in the diet (42%). Supplement users were significantly more likely than nonusers to say that they try to eat a balanced diet, visit their doctor regularly, get a good night's sleep, exercise regularly, and maintain a healthy weight. CONCLUSIONS: Annual consumer surveys over a period of 5 years show that dietary supplement use is somewhat more prevalent in the United States than has been reported in the NHANES surveys, when occasional and seasonal use are taken into account, in addition to regular use. Most dietary supplement users take a multivitamin, and many take a variety of products. The primary reasons given for supplement use are for overall health and wellness or to fill nutrient gaps. Users of dietary supplements are more likely than nonusers to adopt a variety of healthy habits, indicating that supplement use is part of an overall approach to living healthy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».