ArticleBMJ nutrition, prevention & health2022
Cost-effectiveness of vitamin D
Article in BMJ nutrition, prevention & health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vitamin D as a cellular endocrine system: Tissue-specific microcircuits, immune reprogramming, and metabolic resistance.iScience · 2026Review
- Updated perspectives on vitamin D deficiency, screening, supplementation and clinical guidance.Cardiovascular diabetology. Endocrinology reports · 2026Review
- Vitamin D Fortification of Dairy Products in the United Kingdom: What Are the Barriers?Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Review
- Vitamin D deficiency and disease conditions relevant to: Orthopaedic translation.Journal of orthopaedic translation · 2026Review
- The Impact of Vitamin D Supplementation on Postoperative Outcomes Following Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Review
- Philippine Clinical Practice Guidelines for Periodic Health Examination: Screening for Musculoskeletal Disorders.Acta medica Philippina · 2026Article
- Rethinking Vitamin D Deficiency: Controversies and Practical Guidance for Clinical Management.Nutrients · 2025Review
- Can vitamin D supplementation be dangerous? 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and 1,25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration in healthy population and primary hyperparathyroidism: a single-center experience and literature review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
- The mushrooms on the menu (MOM) study: vitamin D mushrooms (UV-exposed) are a feasible and acceptable way to increase vitamin D intake in a residential aged care facility.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study investigated the cost-effectiveness of vitamin D Methods: Three age groups were investigated: (1) ≥50 years, (2) ≥60 years and (3) ≥70 years. Based on the clinical literature, vitamin D Results: The cost/QALY estimates in all three age groups are below the usually acceptable cost-effectiveness threshold of €20 000/QALY. The most cost-effective and least costly intervention was in adults ≥70 years. For this age group, the average annual costs and outcomes would be approximately €5.6 million, 1044 QALYs gained, with a cost/QALY of approximately €5400. The results are most sensitive to the mortality risk reduction following vitamin D Conclusion: The cost-effectiveness of vitamin D
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.