ReviewMethodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal
Vitamin D and Calcium Supplements: Helpful, Harmful, or Neutral for Cardiovascular Risk?
Review in Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Secular trends of vitamin D and calcium intake and their circulating levels in US adults from 2007 to 2018.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- Personalized Approaches to Spine Surgery.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Cow's Milk: A Benefit for Human Health? Omics Tools and Precision Nutrition for Lactose Intolerance Management.Nutrients · 2024Review
- Association of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among postmenopausal females: results from NHANES.Journal of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Cardiovascular Impact of Calcium and Vitamin D Supplements: A Narrative Review.Endocrinology and metabolism (Seoul, Korea) · 2023Review
- The genetic correlation and causal association between key factors that influence vascular calcification and cardiovascular disease incidence.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Minerals and Trace Elements in 990 Beverages and Their Contribution to Dietary Reference Values for German Consumers.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Article
- Interrelationship between Vitamin D and Calcium in Obesity and Its Comorbid Conditions.Nutrients · 2022Review
- Cardiovascular Risk after Kidney Transplantation: Causes and Current Approaches to a Relevant Burden.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Review
- The Relationship of Falls With Achieved 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Levels From Vitamin D Supplementation: The STURDY Trial.Journal of the Endocrine Society · 2022Article
- Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors - 2022.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2022Review
- Ten things to know about ten cardiovascular disease risk factors.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2021Review
- Article
- A Potential Linking between Vitamin D and Adipose Metabolic Disorders.Canadian journal of gastroenterology & hepatology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vitamin D has traditionally been known as the "bone vitamin". However, a large body of observational data has also linked low concentrations of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D), the primary storage form of vitamin D, to an increased risk of incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality, garnering public excitement about the purported nonskeletal benefits of vitamin D. Despite this, more recent meta-analyses and randomized clinical trials have failed to find a beneficial effect of vitamin D supplements on CVD and cancer outcomes. These findings, along with the lack of consensus on optimal serum 25(OH)D concentrations, have dampened some of the initial enthusiasm for vitamin D supplements. Residual confounding or reverse causation may explain some of the discrepancy between the observational and trial results. At this time, vitamin D supplements should not be prescribed for the primary purpose of CVD prevention. Adding to this complexity is the fact that many adults take vitamin D and calcium supplements together for bone health, and there is some concern (albeit inconclusive) related to calcium use and increased CVD risk. In this light, it may be best to achieve the recommended daily allowances of calcium intake through food and reserve calcium supplementation only for those at risk for calcium intake deficiency, with the smallest dosage needed after dietary modifications have been exhausted. In this review, we discuss vitamin D and calcium supplementation and how they may affect cardiovascular health.
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.