Supplement Evidence Density Map 2026

Healthy Aging Atlas Supplement Evidence Density Map 2026 maps 2,156 cleaned supplement-goal pairings by human randomized controlled trial count, meta-analysis count, PubMed hit count, search-demand proxy, commercial-supply proxy, evidence-strength label, and topic cluster. Publication cleanup removed editorial and category artifacts, collapsed duplicate ingredient-goal identities created by legacy aliases or formulation slugs, and recalculated contiguous ranks and tiers. The dataset is intended for consumer supplement evidence literacy and research transparency. It helps distinguish supplement popularity and market availability from mapped published human trial density. It is not a medical advice dataset, product recommendation list, clinical guideline, or claim that any supplement treats, cures, prevents, or diagnoses disease. Headline summary:- 2,156 cleaned supplement-goal pairings- 475 pairings (22.0%) had zero mapped published human RCTs- 861 pairings (39.9%) had one to two mapped RCTs- 741 pairings (34.4%) had three to nine mapped RCTs- 79 pairings (3.7%) had ten or more mapped RCTs- 1,128 pairings (52.3%) had at least one mapped meta-analysis- 122 high-demand pairings (5.7%) had zero mapped RCTs Companion pages:Report: https://healthyagingatlas.com/research/evidence-density-map-2026/Methods: https://healthyagingatlas.com/research/evidence-density-map-2026/methods/CSV: https://healthyagingatlas.com/downloads/evidence-density-map-2026.csv Limitations:- The map measures mapped published evidence density, not clinical efficacy.- RCT and meta-analysis availability can be biased by funding, patentability, publication practices, and commercial incentives.- PubMed and search-demand proxies are not complete measures of the evidence base or consumer behavior.- A zero-RCT pairing means no mapped published human RCTs in this HAA dataset, not proof that a supplement has no possible biological effect.- Evidence labels should not be used as medical recommendations.