ReviewF1000Research2016
Vitamin D supplementation: less controversy, more guidance needed.
Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of vitamin D therapy in improving metabolomic biomarkers in obesity phenotypes: Two randomized clinical trials.International journal of obesity (2005) · 2018Trial
- Radiological Assessment of Sarcopenia and Its Association with Metabolic Markers in Patients with Liver Cirrhosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Determining the vitamin D supplementation duration to reach an adequate or optimal vitamin D status and its effect on blood lipid profiles: a longitudinal study.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2024Article
- Review
- Understanding the Role of Vitamin D in Heart Failure.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- Pivotal role of vitamin D in mitochondrial health, cardiac function, and human reproduction.EXCLI journal · 2022Review
- Association between Vitamin D Supplementation and Mental Health in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Consensus statement from 2Reviews in endocrine & metabolic disorders · 2020Article
- Vitamin D prescribing in children in UK primary care practices: a population-based cohort study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Review
- Article
- Plasma 25-Hydroxy Vitamin D Is Not Associated with Either Cognitive Function or Academic Performance in Adolescents.Nutrients · 2018Article
- Health Risks of Hypovitaminosis D: A Review of New Molecular Insights.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Raising awareness on the therapeutic role of cholecalciferol in CKD: a multidisciplinary-based opinion.Endocrine · 2018Review
- Controversies and challenges in fibromyalgia: a review and a proposal.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2017Review
- Vitamin D Status and Its Association with Parathyroid Hormone Concentration in Brazilians.Journal of nutrition and metabolism · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin D is a secosteroid hormone with multiple functions that extend beyond the regulation of intestinal calcium absorption. In recent years, the publication of research articles investigating associations between vitamin D status and health has reached an all-time high, and an increase in supplementation studies has followed. Given the pleiotropic effects of vitamin D, the scientific focus has gone beyond its known classic benefits on skeletal health to include diabetes and cardiovascular, neurological, respiratory, renal, and liver diseases, yet numerous conflicting findings continue to emerge. This review presents some examples of recent work within the context of controversies surrounding vitamin D and highlights key factors that should be considered when designing vitamin D supplementation regimens.
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.