Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28417313›Full record

ArticleEndocrine2017

Impact of season and different vitamin D thresholds on prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in epidemiological cohorts-a note of caution.

Sara Schramm, Harald Lahner, Karl-Heinz Jöckel, Raimund Erbel, Dagmar Führer, Susanne Moebus, Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Group

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Endocrine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sara SchrammInstitute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany. sara.schramm@uk-essen.de.
Harald LahnerDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Karl-Heinz JöckelInstitute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Raimund ErbelClinic of Cardiology, West-German Heart and Vascular Center Essen, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Dagmar FührerDepartment of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Susanne MoebusInstitute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany.
Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study Group
Institut für Medizinische Informatik, Biometrie und Epidemiologie · DEEssen University Hospital · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe investigated the impact of different cut-offs on the prevalence of 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25-(OH)D] deficiency.

methodsWe used baseline data of 4149 participants (45-75 years, 50% women) of the population-based Heinz Nixdorf Recall study. Serum 25-(OH)D was measured with the Roche Cobas assay. Quartiles (p25, p50, and p75) were calculated. Data were stratified by months, sex, and age. According to the recommendations of 'Dachverband Osteologie', Endocrine Society and National Institute of Health we used 25-(OH)D thresholds of 12, 20, and 30 ng/ml to estimate vitamin D deficiency.

resultsOverall the median of 25-(OH)D was 19.8 ng/ml (p25 = 14.4 ng/ml, p75 = 26.6 ng/ml), with highest concentrations in July (p50 = 23.8 ng/ml, p25 = 18.2 ng/ml, and p75 = 31.2 ng/ml) and lowest in March (p50 = 15.8 ng/ml, p25 = 11.5 ng/ml, and p75 = 20.6 ng/ml). Prevalence of vitamin D deficiency rose from 16, 51 up to 83% using the cut-offs of <12, <20 ng/ml, and <30 ng/ml, respectively. With respect to seasonal variance, prevalence of vitamin D deficiency rose to 92% in February/March using the cut-off <30 ng/ml (<12: 28%, <20 ng/ml: 71%) whereas in June/July prevalence of vitamin D deficiency decreased to 71% (<12: 6%, <20 ng/ml: 30%). The chance to attest the diagnosis of vitamin D deficiency for cut-off 12 ng/ml in March is 6.4-fold higher than in June, for cut-off 20 ng/ml, 5.5-fold higher and for cut-off 30 ng/ml, 3.1-fold higher.

conclusionsGuidelines to define vitamin D deficiency revealed extremely different prevalence rates ranging between 6 and 92%. Accounting for collection time and antecedent sun exposure are important to reduce bias in research studies and improve decision-making in clinical care. Vitamin D thresholds have to be rethought.

Indexed as

SeasonsAgedFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceVitamin DVitamin D Deficiency25-hydroxyvitamin DVitamin D25-(OH)DCohort studyPrevalenceSeasonVitamin DVitamin D deficiency

Identifiers

PMID28417313
OpenAlexW2606392452

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.