ReviewCurrent urology reports2017
Do Calcium Supplements Predispose to Urolithiasis?
Review in Current urology reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Unlocking New Approaches to Urolithiasis ManagementCurrent pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2024Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this study was to investigate the role of calcium supplements, with or without vitamin D, in urinary stone formation in healthy population and in osteoporotic patients as well. Moreover, this review aims to clarify whether or not, and above which dose, they are associated with the risk of lithiasis. RECENT
findingsA research in Medline, Embase, and Scopus databases up to September 2015 was conducted using the following keywords: calcium, supplements, vitamin D, complications, lithiasis, and urinary stone. All types of studies were taken into account (cohort studies, reviews, meta-analyses), and in case they fulfilled the inclusion criteria, they were included in our review. The analysis of the data showed that calcium supplements, probably in association with anti osteoporotic treatment, do not create a predisposition towards lithiasis formation among women suffering from osteoporosis, neither among non-osteoporotic older men. In healthy postmenopausal as well as younger women, the supplements might increase susceptibility to urinary stone formation in long-term basis. The consumption of calcium supplements with the meals could play a protective role in women and younger males. There is certain evidence that supplements containing citrate may be more beneficial over the rest of calcium supplements, particularly when consumed during the meal. Osteoporotic women and healthy men are not at risk of stone formation. On the contrary, healthy women should be aware of the potential risk of developing urinary lithiasis in long-term basis.
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.