Study the Prevalence of Dietary Supplements Use Among Students in Tikrit University
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Dietary supplement use has increased over the past decade in college students. However, even among medical students, the knowledge and understanding of vitamin and mineral supplements is limited and restricted. Objectives: To study the prevalence and patterns of dietary supplements usage among students at Tikrit University. = Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 313 students with an average age of 23 years, predominantly females. The sample was collected from various colleges from Tikrit university, with the majority from the Colleges of Nursing and Medicine. Results: The findings reveal that 55.2% of participants have used dietary supplements continuously over the past six months, with no significant difference in usage between genders or across different colleges and academic years. The most cited reasons for supplement use were on the advice of health experts, to improve overall health and to boost immunity. Vitamin D, Vitamin C, Zinc and Fish oil/Omega-3 emerged as the most commonly consumed supplements. Notably, the choice of supplements was primarily influenced by health experts' advice, supplemented by personal research. However, a quarter of the users (26.6%) reported experiencing side effects, including nausea, insomnia, headaches, fatigue, vertigo, and digestive problems. Conclusion: This study highlights a high prevalence of dietary supplement use among university students and underscores the importance of informed decision-making, guided by professional advice, to mitigate potential adverse effects. The patterns and motivations identified in this research could inform targeted health promotion strategies within university settings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".