↓ Skip to main content

Behaviors of consumers, physicians and pharmacists in response to adverse events associated with dietary supplement use

Overview of attention for article published in Nutrition Journal, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Behaviors of consumers, physicians and pharmacists in response to adverse events associated with dietary supplement use
Published in
Nutrition Journal, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12937-017-0239-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tsuyoshi Chiba, Yoko Sato, Etsuko Kobayashi, Kazuki Ide, Hiroshi Yamada, Keizo Umegaki

Abstract

The prevalence of dietary supplements has increased in Japan, and, as a consequence, the adverse events associated with dietary supplement use have become more prominent. Severe adverse events must be reported to the Japanese government via public health centers. However, the number of cases reported to the Japanese government is limited. To clarify this discrepancy, we conducted an internet questionnaire, and surveyed how consumers, physicians and pharmacists acted when they or their patients developed adverse events due to dietary supplement use. This study was completed by 2732 consumers, 515 physicians, and 515 pharmacist via internet surveillance on November 2015. Although 8.8% of consumers developed adverse events including diarrhea, constipation, stomachache, headache, and nausea and vomiting, most of them did not report their adverse events to public health centers. However, some consumers went to hospitals because of adverse events. We also surveyed how physicians and pharmacists acted when their patients developed adverse events due to dietary supplement use. Most physicians and pharmacists did not report these cases to public health centers because they were unable to definitively prove the cause-and-effect relationship of these adverse events. Furthermore, some physicians and pharmacists did not know how or where to report these adverse events. We clarified the reasons for the limited number of reports of adverse events to the Japanese government in this survey. It is important to encourage not only consumers, but also physicians and pharmacists to report adverse events to public health centers. In addition, an analyzing tool of cause-and-effect relationships might be helpful for physicians and pharmacists.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Researcher 7 11%
Student > Master 6 9%
Lecturer 5 8%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 19 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 11 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 9%
Social Sciences 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 23 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 March 2017.
All research outputs
#13,544,912
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Nutrition Journal
#1,032
of 1,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,839
of 334,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nutrition Journal
#12
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.2. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 334,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.