Health Halo Effect in Supplement Marketing: A Content Analysis of Medical Claims in Community Pharmacies
Author(s)
Marwan Alrasheed, PharmD, PhD1, Reema Almogren, PharmD student2, Abdulaziz Alkhonaizan, PharmD student2, Aliyah Almobarak, PharmD student2, Abdulrahman Alsuhibani, PharmD, M.Sc, PhD3.
1Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 3College of Pharmacy, Qassim University, Onaizah, Saudi Arabia.
1Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 2College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 3College of Pharmacy, Qassim University, Onaizah, Saudi Arabia.
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the health-related claims made for dietary supplements marketed through community pharmacies in Saudi Arabia, evaluate their regulatory risk levels, and assess their compliance with Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA) guidelines. The study also aimed to classify claims by health category and examine the relationship between claim types and regulatory risk. These findings aim to support regulatory efforts and enhance public health education.
METHODS: A cross-sectional content analysis was conducted on 251 supplement products extracted from leading community pharmacies in Saudi Arabia. Claims were thematically categorized and assessed using a rule-based natural language processing (NLP) classifier. Risk levels were determined through content analysis and classified as low, medium, or high based on the language used in the claims, guided by the SFDA regulatory document on products claim. A verb frequency analysis was performed to explore common linguistic patterns. Chi-square testing was used to examine the association between claim categories and regulatory risk levels.
RESULTS: Of the 251 claims analyzed, 173 (68.9%) were classified as low risk, 7 (2.8%) as medium risk, and 71 (28.3%) as high risk. The most common claim categories were bone/joint health (14%), immune support (10%), general wellness/wellbeing (10%), hair/skin/nails (7%), energy/fatigue (7%), antioxidant/detox (6%), and cardiovascular health (6%). High-risk claims were most concentrated in categories related to bone/joint health, general wellness, and cardiovascular support. The most frequent action verbs were “support,” “improve,” and “treat.” A significant association was observed between claim category and regulatory risk level (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: A significant share of supplement claims suggests therapeutic benefits that may mislead consumers under the guise of health promotion. This underscores the urgent need for strengthened regulatory oversight and proactive consumer education. By addressing misleading claims and raising public awareness, stakeholders can help curb the health halo effect and promote informed, safe supplement use in the community.
METHODS: A cross-sectional content analysis was conducted on 251 supplement products extracted from leading community pharmacies in Saudi Arabia. Claims were thematically categorized and assessed using a rule-based natural language processing (NLP) classifier. Risk levels were determined through content analysis and classified as low, medium, or high based on the language used in the claims, guided by the SFDA regulatory document on products claim. A verb frequency analysis was performed to explore common linguistic patterns. Chi-square testing was used to examine the association between claim categories and regulatory risk levels.
RESULTS: Of the 251 claims analyzed, 173 (68.9%) were classified as low risk, 7 (2.8%) as medium risk, and 71 (28.3%) as high risk. The most common claim categories were bone/joint health (14%), immune support (10%), general wellness/wellbeing (10%), hair/skin/nails (7%), energy/fatigue (7%), antioxidant/detox (6%), and cardiovascular health (6%). High-risk claims were most concentrated in categories related to bone/joint health, general wellness, and cardiovascular support. The most frequent action verbs were “support,” “improve,” and “treat.” A significant association was observed between claim category and regulatory risk level (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: A significant share of supplement claims suggests therapeutic benefits that may mislead consumers under the guise of health promotion. This underscores the urgent need for strengthened regulatory oversight and proactive consumer education. By addressing misleading claims and raising public awareness, stakeholders can help curb the health halo effect and promote informed, safe supplement use in the community.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
HPR112
Topic
Epidemiology & Public Health, Health Policy & Regulatory, Real World Data & Information Systems
Topic Subcategory
Approval & Labeling
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas