ArticlePloS one2023
Using a low-dose ultraviolet-B lighting solution during working hours: An explorative investigation towards the effectivity in maintaining healthy vitamin D levels.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study examined whether daily safe, low-dose ultraviolet-B (UVB) exposure using a home-based lighting solution could maintain healthy serum 25(OH)D during winter.
methodsTwenty-eight (12 male, 16 female) daytime (~9:00 to 17:00) indoor workers (mean age = 42.46; SD = 14.23) participated in this study and were allocated to one of the two study conditions. During an 8-week period, fourteen participants received extra UVB exposure (max 0.3 standard erythema dose (SED) daily), while fourteen participants in the control group did not receive extra UVB exposure. Daily questionnaires were used to measure UVB exposure time, exposed body surface area (BSA), and time spent outside in daylight. Serum 25(OH)D, vitamin D related food intake, and secondary parameters (i.e., subjective fatigue, sleep timing and quality) were investigated at baseline, Week 4, and Week 8.
resultsSerum 25(OH)D significantly declined over the 8-week study period in both groups. The combination of using a low-dose UVB exposure, a small BSA, and a lower-than-expected amount of exposure hours likely resulted in an insufficient UVB dose to significantly improve serum 25(OH)D. Changes in serum 25(OH)D over time did not significantly correlate with changes in secondary parameters of sleep and fatigue.
conclusionThe received low-dose UVB exposure in this study did not significantly change serum 25(OH)D during the winter period. Future research could explore whether a longer lasting exposure period and/or using different exposure positions of the device (maximizing exposed skin surface) yields more promising results for improving serum 25(OH)D.
trial registrationTrial registration: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN47902923.
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.