Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27718150›Full record

Trial reportEndocrine2017

Randomized clinical trial to comparing efficacy of daily, weekly and monthly administration of vitamin D

István Takács, Béla E Tóth, László Szekeres, Boglárka Szabó, Bence Bakos, Péter Lakatos

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Endocrine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Effect of vitamin D supplementation on depression in older Australian adults.International journal of geriatric psychiatry · 2023
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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

6 authors.

István Takács1st Department of Internal Medicine, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine, Koranyi Sándor u. str 2/a, Budapest, 1083, Hungary. takacs.istvan@med.semmelweis-univ.hu.
Béla E TóthDepartment of Pharmaceutical Surveillance and Economy, University of Debrecen Faculty of Pharmacy, Nagyerdei krt 98, Debrecen, 4032, Hungary.
László SzekeresNational Institute of Rheumatology and Physiotherapy, Frankel Leo str. 25-29, Budapest, 1023, Hungary.
Boglárka Szabó1st Department of Internal Medicine, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine, Koranyi Sándor u. str 2/a, Budapest, 1083, Hungary.
Bence Bakos1st Department of Internal Medicine, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine, Koranyi Sándor u. str 2/a, Budapest, 1083, Hungary.
Péter Lakatos1st Department of Internal Medicine, Semmelweis University Faculty of Medicine, Koranyi Sándor u. str 2/a, Budapest, 1083, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The comparative efficacy and safety profiles of selected daily 1000 IU, weekly 7000 IU and monthly 30,000 IU vitamin D

Indexed as

Dietary SupplementsAdultAgedCalcifediolCholecalciferolCohort StudiesFemaleHumansHungaryMaleMiddle AgedPatient ComplianceTabletsTherapeutic EquivalencyTime FactorsVitamin D DeficiencyCalcifediolCholecalciferolTabletsDeficiencyEfficacyTreatmentVitamin D3

Identifiers

PMID27718150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.