ArticlePloS one2018
Trends in vitamin D supplement use in a general female and breast cancer population in Ireland: A repeated cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Power determination in vitamin D randomised control trials and characterising factors affecting it through a novel simulation-based tool.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Effect of Selected Factors on the Serum 25(OH)D Concentration in Women Treated for Breast Cancer.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Vitamin DCurrent nutrition reports · 2019Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVitamin D has been linked with improved survival after breast cancer diagnosis but little is known about prescribing rates. This study investigates trends in vitamin D supplement use in both a general female and breast cancer population.
methodsWomen with a breast cancer diagnosis were identified from the National Cancer Registry of Ireland (n = 19870). Women who had any vitamin D claim between 2005 and 2011 were identified from pharmacy claims data (n = 8556). Prevalence rates were calculated as a proportion of all eligible women and by age (< 55 years, ≥ 55 years). Poisson regression was used to compare rates of vitamin D prescribing across years (risk ratio (RR), 95% CI).
resultsThere was a statistically significant increase in women with a claim for vitamin D between 2005-2011, with the largest increase among breast cancer patients aged ≥ 55 years (RR = 2.26; 95% CI, 2.11-2.42).
conclusionThis may have significant public health implications if associations between vitamin D and improved breast cancer survival prove to be causal.
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.