Table 6 A comparison of how commercial and noncommercial websites portray probiotics
N (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Total | Com | Non-Com | p-value | |
Stance | ||||
explicit endorsement of probiotic use | 40 (56) | 33 (83) | 7 (17) | .001 † |
Use of Probiotics Suggested by an Identifiable Individual | ||||
physician | 16 (23) | 10 (63) | 6 (37) | .396 |
other medical professional | 22 (31) | 11 (50) | 11 (50) | 1.00 |
patient or consumer | 15 (21) | 10 (67) | 5 (33) | .245 |
identified corporate representative | 5 (7) | 5 (100) | — | .050 † |
Role of Physicians | ||||
encourage discussion with MD | 33 (47) | 16 (48) | 17 (52) | .814 |
Disclaimer | ||||
not FDA approved | 14 (20) | 12 (86) | 2 (14) | .006 † |
“not intended as substitute for medical advice or care” | 23(32) | 15 (65) | 8 (35) | .129 |
General Statements of Benefit and Risk | ||||
statement indicating broad benefit of probiotics | 42 (59) | 26 (62) | 16 (38) | .031 † |
statement indicating probiotics are generally safe | 35 (49) | 17 (49) | 18 (51) | .814 |
Number of Benefits and Risks Described |
|
|
| p-value |
benefits | 10.17 ± 8.27 | 10.58 | 9.74 | .672 |
risks | 1.79 ± 2.59 | 1.00 | 3.03 | .002 ‡ |