Supplement evidence

021 / 575Combination

Multivitamin/mineral

View my plan →

The short answer

Conveniently filling selected nutrient gaps when diet or life stage makes adequacy difficult.

Evidence and scope: Mixed evidence
This status does not grade the ingredient for every goal, outcome, or person.
Important limitation: Evidence is insufficient for preventing cardiovascular disease, cancer, or mortality in generally healthy adults.
Before deciding: Watch duplication across products and excess vitamin A, iron, zinc, or other nutrients.

01 / PRACTICAL GUIDE

Dose, absorption, and combinations

These are indication-specific reference or studied ranges—not a personalized prescription. Start with the objective, then check the form, label, medicines, and health conditions.

Reference range by objective

Meeting usual needsUsually one standard serving near 100% Daily Value rather than megadose formulas

Reference or studied range—not a personalized prescription. The product label or a clinician may specify a different dose.

Dose source ↗

More is not automatically better. A clinician or product label may specify a different amount.

Absorption / solubilityFormulation-dependent

Not usefully classified as a fat- or water-soluble vitamin; absorption depends on the salt, extract, delivery system, and meal.

How it is commonly taken

Take with food to improve tolerance and fat-soluble vitamin absorption.

Do not combine casually

Check duplicate vitamin A, D, iron, zinc, selenium, and vitamin K; warfarin and pregnancy change the choice.

Dose and use source ↗

Dose and use links lead to primary or official source material. Search links are discovery tools, not proof that every returned paper applies.

02 / EVIDENCE

What the research says

We keep supportive, mixed, negative, safety, and contextual findings together. The headline never replaces the underlying papers.

4research papers in this ledger

4unique primary studies represented

36,083unique participants represented

These are audited counts for this JIVANA collection, not search-result totals. Participants are counted once when multiple papers use the same cohort; review papers are not added again to participant totals.

Open the research timelineResearch timeline

Entries are ordered by publication year. A study period appears only when the source reports it.

2024

Mixed or qualifiedPMID 38244989 · NCT02422745 · NCT03035201 · NCT04582617

Effect of multivitamin-mineral supplementation versus placebo on cognitive function

Pooled effects on global cognition and episodic memory were statistically favorable but small; the clinic estimate for global cognition included no effect.

Published: 2024Duration: 2 years in COSMOS-Clinicn=5,203 participants · counted once3 primary studies represented

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized clinic subcohort plus meta-analysis of 3 nonoverlapping COSMOS cognitive substudies
Population: 5,203 older adults across three cognitive substudies within the 21,442-person COSMOS cohort
Intervention: The COSMOS daily multivitamin-mineral product versus placebo
Outcome: Global cognition, episodic memory, executive function, and attention

Funding or conflict note: This is a secondary outcome within COSMOS and tests one formulation; it is not proof of dementia prevention.

Open research record ↗

2022

Does not support the tested claimPMID 35294969 · NCT02422745

Multivitamins in the prevention of cancer and cardiovascular disease: COSMOS

The tested product did not reduce total cancer, cardiovascular events, or all-cause mortality. A lung-cancer subgroup signal needs confirmation.

Published: 2022Duration: Median 3.6 yearsn=21,442 participants · counted once3 primary studies represented

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled 2×2 factorial trial
Population: 21,442 U.S. adults: women 65+ and men 60+
Intervention: A daily multivitamin-mineral product versus placebo
Outcome: Cancer, cardiovascular disease, mortality, and safety

Study period: 2015–2020

Funding or conflict note: The result applies to the specific formulation tested, not every multivitamin.

Open research record ↗

2012

Does not support the tested claimPMID 23117775 · NCT00270647

Multivitamins in the prevention of cardiovascular disease in men

Daily multivitamin use did not reduce major cardiovascular events, heart attack, stroke, cardiovascular death, or total mortality.

Published: 2012Duration: Median 11.2 yearsn=14,641 participants · counted once

Study design and methods

Design: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial
Population: 14,641 U.S. male physicians aged 50 or older
Intervention: A common daily multivitamin versus placebo
Outcome: Major cardiovascular events and mortality

Open research record ↗

2012

Mixed or qualifiedPMID 23162860 · NCT00270647

Multivitamins in the prevention of cancer in men

Total cancer incidence was modestly lower, but no significant benefit appeared for major site-specific cancers or cancer mortality. The shared cohort is counted once.

Published: 2012Duration: Median 11.2 yearsn=14,641 participants · counted once

Study design and methods

Design: Cancer-outcome analysis of the Physicians' Health Study II randomized trial
Population: The same 14,641 U.S. male physicians aged 50 or older
Intervention: A common daily multivitamin versus placebo
Outcome: Total and site-specific cancer and cancer mortality

Open research record ↗

Unscreened discovery appendix—not evidence701 candidate publicationsSearch run: Aug 21, 2026

Complete for the displayed PubMed query at the search timestamp—not for all databases or every possible synonym. Candidates can be irrelevant, duplicate the same study, or report negative findings. They are never summed as evidence or participants until screened.

03 / SOURCES

Start with the source material

Official evidence overviewU.S. Preventive Services Task Force Live PubMed discovery searchNational Library of Medicine

The live search is for discovery only. Search-result counts change and are not included in the audited totals above.

Recent PubMed discovery recordsDirect links to the first 12 records returned by the reproducible search. These are discovery candidates—not reviewed summaries or a count of supportive findings.

04 / EXPERT CONTEXT

Expert context—not evidence

Expert positions are dated context—not scientific evidence. They never raise the evidence status or become consensus by repetition.

No direct, source-verified endorsement is currently recorded. Research authorship or discussion alone is not treated as endorsement.