Evidence mapPaperPMID 41544018Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

The quality and safety of Rhodiola rosea supplements on the U.S. market: An analysis of biomarkers, heavy metals, and pesticide residues.

Steffen Porwollik, Mahtab Jafari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Steffen PorwollikSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Mahtab JafariSchool of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, Irvine, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1224-338X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rhodiola rosea supplements have become popular in the U.S., with a $3.4 billion market and an annual growth of about 10% in sales in the past few years. While the health benefits of this plant have been evaluated in many scientific studies, the potential differences in quality of these botanical products on the U.S. market have not been studied in detail. Using reversed-phase ultra-performance liquid chromatography, we determined the concentrations of the biomarker molecules, rosavins and salidroside, in a small but representative sample of R. rosea dietary supplement products commercially available in the U.S. Concentrations of rosavins and salidroside ranged from 0.01% to 3.08% and 0.07% to 2.91%, respectively, including substantial aberrations from advertised biomarker amounts. One product showed an undisclosed likely addition of synthetic salidroside. We also assessed heavy metal contaminations via inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and pesticide contents by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry or liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry in these botanical products. While pesticide levels were below detection limits, all seven tested capsular products had trace amounts of arsenic, cobalt, and lead. Two of these contained notably elevated levels of cobalt and arsenic, where follow-up arsenic speciation would be required to verify whether they remain within minimal risk levels established by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Overall, these results underscore the need for more stringent quality control in herbal supplements containing R. rosea available in the U.S.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsMetals, HeavyPesticide ResiduesRhodiolaBiomarkersChromatography, High Pressure LiquidDisaccharidesGlucosidesPhenolsUnited StatesBiomarkersDisaccharidesGlucosidesMetals, HeavyPesticide ResiduesPhenolsrhodiolosiderosavin

Identifiers

PMID41544018
PMCPMC12810810

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.