Trial reportThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2017
Vitamin D Supplementation in Nursing Home Residents: Randomized Single Cholecalciferol Loading Protocol vs. Individualized Loading Dose Regimen.
Trial report in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin D deficiency in nursing home residents: a systematic review.Nutrition reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Review
- Vitamin D dosing considerations in COVID-19.Geriatric nursing (New York, N.Y.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of a single cholecalciferol loading protocol in nursing home (NH) residents taking no VitD supplementation at regular basis.
designRandomized single-blind controlled study.
settingOne NH.
participantsAll residents.
interventionFrom March 21st to May 19th, 2015, NH residents were randomly assigned to either 4x100'000IU to be taken every 2 weeks (treatment group) or an individualized regimen according to baseline 25(OH)VitD level (control group). MEASUREMENTS: 25(OH)VitD, calcium, phosphorus, parathyroid hormone, alkaline phosphatase, and creatinine serum levels were centrally measured at day 7 after the last dose in both groups, and at baseline in the control group.
results111 residents (mean age 85.1±6.7 years) were randomized to the treatment (N=53) or the control group (N=58). No significant difference in terms of demographic characteristics, risk for osteoporosis, and past history of VitD supplementation was measured. At baseline, 37.9%, 25.5% and 5.2% were respectively sub-optimal, insufficient, and deficient for VitD. Whatever the study group, at the 7th day after the last dose of cholecalciferol, 100% of residents reached serum values ≥20ng/mL (p value for non-inferiority <0.001 and p value for superiority p=1.00) and 93.6 vs. 88.2% reached values ≥30ng/mL in the treatment and control group respectively (p value for non-inferiority <0.01 and p value for superiority p=0.48). While mean value was higher in the treatment group (50.2±615.4 vs. 35.8±66.5ng/mL; p<0.0001), none of participants have seen their value >150 ng/mL. Not any biological adverse effects was measured.
conclusionThis study confirmed that a single loading protocol is at least as effective and safe as tailored regimen in terms of the ability to rapidly normalize 25(OH)VitD values. The often required dosage of 25(OH)VitD is reasonably not necessary to initiate VitD supplementation protocol in this vulnerable population.
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.