ArticleDrugs & aging2016
Vitamin D Supplementation in Tasmanian Nursing Home Residents.
Article in Drugs & aging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The quality of care delivered to residents in long-term care in Australia: an indicator-based review of resident records (CareTrack Aged study).BMC medicine · 2024Article
- Increasing the uptake of vitamin D supplement use in Australian residential aged care facilities: results from the vitamin D implementation (ViDAus) study.BMC geriatrics · 2020Article
- Association between quantitative bone ultrasound and self-reported physical activity in nursing homes residents.European geriatric medicine · 2019Article
- Anti-osteoporosis Medication Use in a High Fracture-Risk Population: Contemporary Trends in Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities.Health services insights · 2019Article
- Prevalence of vitamin D supplement use in Australian residential aged care facilities in November 2014.BMC research notes · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIt is currently recommended in Australia that nursing home residents are supplemented daily with 1000 IU vitamin D as they are at an increased risk of fractures. Historically, supplementation has been low, and current supplementation prevalence is not known.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of vitamin D supplementation amongst nursing home residents in Tasmania, Australia.
methodsResident data, including demographics, medical conditions and medications (including vitamin D and calcium supplement use), exercise and sun exposure, were obtained from residents' files and staff in consenting nursing homes. Dietary calcium intake was estimated from the weekly menu of one nursing home and total calcium intake estimated from this and calcium supplement use. The prevalence of vitamin D supplementation was compared by resident characteristics and fracture risk factors.
resultsOf 811 residents, 409 (50 %) received daily vitamin D supplementation of at least 1000 IU. Residents receiving vitamin D supplementation were slightly younger (mean 83 vs. 85 years for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.003) and more likely to have osteoporosis (29 vs. 22 % for supplemented and unsupplemented groups, respectively, p = 0.019). Only 43 % of residents with osteoporosis received vitamin D supplements. Most residents (86 %) did not have regular sunlight exposure. The median estimated total calcium intake of 800 ± 275 mg daily was below guideline recommendations of 1000-1300 mg daily.
conclusionsThe prevalence of vitamin D supplementation in nursing home residents was relatively low, suggesting poor adherence to the relevant clinical guidelines. Additionally, most residents do not access sunlight. Interventions addressing this evidence-practice gap are needed.
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.