Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23626678›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2013

Impact of vitamin D on chronic kidney diseases in non-dialysis patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Lijuan Xu, Xuesi Wan, Zhimin Huang, Fangfang Zeng, Guohong Wei, Donghong Fang, Wanping Deng, Yanbing Li

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lijuan XuDepartment of Endocrinology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, China.
Xuesi Wan
Zhimin Huang
Fangfang Zeng
Guohong Wei
Donghong Fang
Wanping Deng
Yanbing Li
The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesRecent studies have supported a role for both newer and more established vitamin D compounds in improving proteinuria, although systematic evaluation is lacking. Furthermore, concerns remain regarding the influence of vitamin D on the progression of renal function. We analyzed the efficacy and safety of vitamin D in non-dialysis patients and compared the use of newer versus established vitamin D compounds by performing a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

designA literature search of PubMed (1975 to September, 2012), EMBASE.com (1966 to September, 2012) and Ovid EBM Reviews (through September, 2012) was conducted.

resultsEighteen studies were eligible for final inclusion; of these, six explored the effects of vitamin D on proteinuria, twelve studied the effects of supplementation on renal function, and fifteen discussed the incidence of hypercalcemia. Compared to the placebo or no interference, both the newer and established vitamin D sterols reduced proteinuria to a similar extent (RR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.42 to 2.81). No decrease in the glomerular filter rate was observed (SMD, -0.10; 95%CI, -0.24 to 0.03), and the risk for dialysis initiation was 1.48 (95% CI, 0.54 to 4.03) with vitamin D treatment. Additionally, there was an increased risk of hypercalcemia for patients treated with either newer or established vitamin D compounds as compared with the controls (RR, 4.78; 95% CI, 2.20 to 10.37). The head-to-head studies showed no differences in the effects of either newer or established compounds on proteinuria or the risk of hypercalcemia. No serious adverse events were associated with the administration of vitamin D.

conclusionsVitamin D therapy appears to decrease proteinuria and have no negative influence on renal function in non-dialysis patients. But the occurrence of hypercalcemia should be evaluated when vitamin D is provided. No superiority for newer versus established vitamin D analogue is found.

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsAdultAgedDatabases, BibliographicGlomerular Filtration RateHumansHypercalcemiaMiddle AgedProteinuriaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRenal Insufficiency, ChronicVitamin DVitamin D

Identifiers

PMID23626678
PMCPMC3634086
OpenAlexW1992888295

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.