SynthesisNutrients2014
Vitamin D and depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing studies with and without biological flaws.
Synthesis in Nutrients, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 142 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
142 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 288 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the effect of dietary and nutritional interventions on the behaviours and mental health of prisoners.The British journal of nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Neuropsychology review · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy of vitamin D supplementation on depressive symptoms in older patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Supplementation of Vitamin D and Mental Health in Adults with Respiratory System Diseases: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2023Pooled it
- Effect of Vitamin D Supplementation on Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs).Nutrients · 2023Pooled it
- Association of a low vitamin D status with risk of post-stroke depression: A meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- Mapping the citation network on vitamin D research in Australia: a data-driven approach.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Effect of vitamin D supplementation on the incidence and prognosis of depression: An updated meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2022Pooled it
- Vitamin D Supplementation and Mental Health in Multiple Sclerosis Patients: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Influence of Vitamin D Supplementation on Mental Health in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- Vitamin D Supplementation and Mental Health in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases and Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- The Influence of Vitamin D Intake and Status on Mental Health in Children: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2021Pooled it
- The Health Effects of Vitamin D and Probiotic Co-Supplementation: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- Role of Vitamin D in Preventing and Treating Selected Extraskeletal Diseases-An Umbrella Review.Nutrients · 2020Pooled it
- Dietary Inflammatory Potential and the Risk of Incident Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2019Pooled it
- Non-skeletal health effects of vitamin D supplementation: A systematic review on findings from meta-analyses summarizing trial data.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in major depression: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of postgraduate medicinePooled it
- The impact of vitamin D supplementation on depression and anxiety in young individuals with depression and vitamin D insufficiency/deficiency.European journal of nutrition · 2026Trial
- Does Vitamin D3 Supplementation Improve Depression Scores among Rural Adolescents? A Randomized Controlled Trial.Nutrients · 2024Trial
82 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efficacy of Vitamin D supplements in depression is controversial, awaiting further literature analysis. Biological flaws in primary studies is a possible reason meta-analyses of Vitamin D have failed to demonstrate efficacy. This systematic review and meta-analysis of Vitamin D and depression compared studies with and without biological flaws. The systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The literature search was undertaken through four databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies were critically appraised for methodological quality and biological flaws, in relation to the hypothesis and study design. Meta-analyses were performed for studies according to the presence of biological flaws. The 15 RCTs identified provide a more comprehensive evidence-base than previous systematic reviews; methodological quality of studies was generally good and methodology was diverse. A meta-analysis of all studies without flaws demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in depression with Vitamin D supplements (+0.78 CI +0.24, +1.27). Studies with biological flaws were mainly inconclusive, with the meta-analysis demonstrating a statistically significant worsening in depression by taking Vitamin D supplements (-1.1 CI -0.7, -1.5). Vitamin D supplementation (≥800 I.U. daily) was somewhat favorable in the management of depression in studies that demonstrate a change in vitamin levels, and the effect size was comparable to that of anti-depressant medication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.