ArticleBone2018
Trends in calcium supplementation, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2014.
Article in Bone, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genetic predisposition to increased serum calcium, bone mineral density, and fracture risk in individuals with normal calcium levels: mendelian randomisation study.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Pooled it
- Secular trends of vitamin D and calcium intake and their circulating levels in US adults from 2007 to 2018.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Quantity, Duration, Adherence, and Reasons for Dietary Supplement Use among Adults: Results from NHANES 2011-2018.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Trends in Calcium Intake among the US Population: Results from the NHANES (1999-2018).Nutrients · 2024Article
- Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Bone Health and Outcomes in the United States.Journal of bone and mineral research : the official journal of the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research · 2021Review
- Calcium Intake from Food and Supplemental Sources Decreased in the Canadian Population from 2004 to 2015.The Journal of nutrition · 2020Article
- Influence of Pulsed Electric Field on Accumulation of Calcium inJournal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2020Article
- Associations between serum calcium, 25(OH)D level and bone mineral density in older adults.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundLong-term outcomes of supplemental calcium are inadequately understood. Recent research suggests that calcium from supplements may not be entirely free from unintended health consequences. Consequently, it is important to understand patterns and trends in use of calcium supplements.
objectiveTo report trends in supplemental calcium intake between 1999 and 2014, using NHANES data, overall and stratified by sex, race/ethnicity and age.
methodsA total of 42,038 adult NHANES participants were included in this analysis. For each survey period, we calculated the prevalence of calcium supplement use exceeding the Estimated Average Requirement (EAR) and Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (UL), and mean daily supplemental calcium dose among calcium-containing supplement users. Sample weights were applied. Linear regression was used to examine trends.
resultsOverall, the prevalence of calcium supplement use at a dose ≥EAR increased between 1999 and 2000 and 2013-2014, from 2.5% (95% CI: 1.9-3.3%) to 4.6% (3.8-5.5%). Use ≥EAR peaked in 2003-2004 at 6.7% (5.3-8.5%) (p-quadratic trend<0.001). Mean supplemental calcium intake peaked in 2007-2008, thereafter decreasing (p-quadratic trend<0.001). The overall prevalence of intake ≥UL from supplemental calcium in 2013-2014 was 0.4% (0.2-0.8%). Use of supplemental calcium ≥UL peaked during 2007-2008 at 1.2% (0.7-2.0%). In all time periods, supplemental calcium intake tended to be greater among women, non-Hispanic whites and adults >60years.
conclusionsWe described the prevalence of U.S. adults consuming supplemental calcium ≥UL and ≥ EAR. While few were consuming supplemental calcium ≥UL, consumption ≥EAR was not uncommon, especially among women, non-Hispanic whites and older adults.
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.