Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34496802›Full record

ReviewBMC pediatrics2021

Vitamin D prophylaxis in infancy.

Sophie Jullien

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC pediatrics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Importance of Determining the Level of Bone Metabolism Markers and Vitamin D in the First Year of Life in the Kazakh Population.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sophie JullienBarcelona Institute for Global Health, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. sophjullien@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-5587-626X
Barcelona Institute for Global Health · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We looked at existing recommendations and supporting evidence on the effectiveness of vitamin D supplementation in infancy for reducing vitamin D deficiency and for preventing rickets and infections. We also looked at optimal dose of vitamin D and the age until which vitamin D supplementation is beneficial.We conducted a literature search up to the 17th of July 2019 by using key terms and manual search in selected sources. We summarized the recommendations and the strength of the recommendation when and as reported by the authors. We summarized the main findings of systematic reviews with the certainty of the evidence as reported.A daily dose of 400 international units of vitamin D in infants has shown to be effective for improving bone health and preventing rickets. Evidence is more robust in groups of infants and children at risk. Vitamin D supplementation is well tolerated, and not associated with toxicity. Higher doses have not shown to add benefit while it could potentially cause toxic blood levels and hypercalcemia. Adequate levels of vitamin D might not be achieved with lower daily doses. Universal vitamin D supplementation starting shortly after birth, regardless of the mode of feeding and until 12 months of age, is strongly recommended. Beyond 12 months of age vitamin D supplementation is recommended only in groups of children at risk.

Indexed as

RicketsVitamin D DeficiencyChildDietary SupplementsHumansInfantSystematic Reviews as TopicVitamin DVitaminsVitamin DVitamins25-hydroxyvitamin DInfantsRicketsVitamin D supplementation

Identifiers

PMID34496802
PMCPMC8424795
OpenAlexW3196768965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.