Bibliometric analysis visualizes dietary supplement research for menopausal symptoms in the US, suggesting limited collaboration and disorganized efforts.
OBJECTIVE: To visualize the research landscape and evolution of dietary supplements investigated for menopausal symptom management and associated health outcomes. METHODS: A Web of Science search yielded 4,434 English-language articles limited to published literature from the years 2000-2024. Inclusion criteria were studies conducted in the United States, or in collaboration with the United States, that were dietary supplement-based interventions. R's Bibliometrix package was used to conduct all bibliometric analyses. RESULTS: The final data set included 253 publications and showed a low annual scientific productivity growth rate (3.89%), with most articles focused on postmenopause (n = 234). Over 80 unique ingredients were assessed, with calcium, vitamin D, and isoflavones as the most studied. Limited collaboration was observed among the most productive authors, indicated by the limited number of connections between research groups. Cardiovascular-related outcomes and bone health were prominent research themes. Author keywords co-word analysis identified 14 thematic clusters that encompass multiple disciplines. Recent important topics included nitric oxide, aging, and inflammation, whereas emerging themes were related to (1) vitamin D and musculoskeletal health, and (2) calcium, blood pressure, and weight loss. CONCLUSION: Dietary supplement research during the menopause transition has remained limited over the last two decades, with perimenopause notably underrepresented. The large number of distinct ingredients, coupled with limited collaborations among researchers, suggests dispersed research efforts and few replication studies. The imbalance between the number of ingredients studied and supporting studies may hinder the development of evidence-based guidance, but also presents an opportunity to harmonize research efforts and produce stronger science.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Canino et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: