Editing Dietary supplement (section)

===Reporting bias===
A review of clinical trials registered at [[clinicaltrials.gov]], which would include both drugs and supplements, reported that nearly half of completed trials were sponsored wholly or partially by industry.<ref name=Dunn2014>{{cite journal | vauthors = Dunn AG, Coiera E | title = Should comparative effectiveness research ignore industry-funded data? | journal = Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research | volume = 3 | issue = 4 | pages = 317–20 | date = July 2014 | pmid = 25275226 | doi = 10.2217/cer.14.31 | doi-access = free }}</ref> This does not automatically imply bias, but there is evidence that because of selective non-reporting, results in support of a potential drug or supplement ingredient are more likely to be published than results that do not demonstrate a statistically significant benefit.<ref name=Dunn2014 /><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Knottnerus JA, Tugwell P | title = The potential impact of unpublished results | journal = Journal of Clinical Epidemiology | volume = 66 | issue = 10 | pages = 1061–63 | date = October 2013 | pmid = 23993310 | doi = 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.001 | doi-access = free }}</ref> One review reported that fewer than half of the registered clinical trials resulted in publication in peer-reviewed journals.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Zarin DA, Tse T, Sheehan J | title = The proposed rule for U.S. clinical trial registration and results submission | journal = The New England Journal of Medicine | volume = 372 | issue = 2 | pages = 174–80 | date = January 2015 | pmid = 25539444 | pmc = 4344313 | doi = 10.1056/NEJMsr1414226 }}</ref>