Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37418225›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychology review2024

Effects of Vitamin D Supplementation on Cognitive Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Wen-Yin Chen, Ying-Chih Cheng, Chih-Chiang Chiu, Hsing-Cheng Liu, Ming-Chyi Huang, Yu-Kang Tu, Po-Hsiu Kuo

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychology review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors.

Wen-Yin Chen *Department of Psychiatry, Taipei City Psychiatric Center, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ying-Chih Cheng *Institute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Chih-Chiang ChiuDepartment of Psychiatry, Taipei City Psychiatric Center, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Hsing-Cheng LiuDepartment of Psychiatry, Taipei City Psychiatric Center, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ming-Chyi HuangDepartment of Psychiatry, Taipei City Psychiatric Center, Taipei City Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yu-Kang TuInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. yukangtu@ntu.edu.tw.
Po-Hsiu KuoInstitute of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, College of Public Health, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. phkuo@ntu.edu.tw.

Funding

Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan MOST-110-2314-B-532-007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical studies examining the effects of vitamin D on cognition have reported inconsistent results. To date, no comprehensive study has examined this effect on the basis of sample characteristics or intervention model-related factors. This systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigated the effects of vitamin D supplementation on global cognitive function and specific cognitive domains. This review was preregistered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42021249908) and comprised 24 trials enrolling 7557 participants (mean age: 65.21 years; 78.54% women). The meta-analysis revealed that vitamin D significantly influenced global cognition (Hedges' g = 0.128, p = .008) but not specific cognitive domains. A subgroup analysis indicated that the effect size of vitamin D was stronger for vulnerable populations (Hedges' g = 0.414) and those with baseline vitamin D deficiency (Hedges' g = 0.480). On the basis of subgroup analyses in studies without biological flaws (Hedges' g = 0.549), we suggest that an intervention model should correct baseline vitamin D deficiency. Our results indicate that vitamin D supplementation has a small but significant positive effect on cognition in adults.

Indexed as

CognitionDietary SupplementsVitamin DAgedFemaleHumansMaleRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicVitamin D DeficiencyVitamin DBiological flawCognitionNutrientsRandomized controlled trialVitamin D deficiency

Identifiers

PMID37418225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.