Regulatory alerts for dietary supplements in Canada and the United States, 2005–13
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Dietary supplement regulatory alerts published by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Health Canada were evaluated and characterized. METHODS: FDA MedWatch and Health Canada websites were reviewed to identify regulatory alerts regarding dietary supplements from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2013. Alerts were analyzed to identify product characteristics that may be predictive of product quality issues and potential patient harm. RESULTS: A total of 1560 dietary supplement-related regulatory alerts were identified. Of those, 1287 (83%) were identified through Health Canada, and 273 (18%) were identified through FDA MedWatch. The country of origin of dietary supplements associated with regulatory alerts was not provided in most regulatory alerts; however, when their origin was provided, the United States was the most common. Dietary supplements intended for sexual enhancement were the subject of 33% of all regulatory alerts identified. Products purchased online were the most likely to be associated with a regulatory alert. Dietary supplements intended for sexual enhancement, weight loss, and bodybuilding or athletic performance appeared to pose the greatest risk for patient harm due to product contamination with a pharmaceutical such as a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor or sibutramine. CONCLUSION: Analysis of Canadian and U.S. regulatory alerts concerning dietary supplements revealed that more than 80% of the composite alerts were issued by Health Canada. The most common intended uses of supplements for which alerts were issued were sexual enhancement, weight loss, and bodybuilding or athletic performance. The most common reason for alerts was the presence of a pharmaceutical contaminant.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".