Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38236394›Full record

ReviewAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2024

Evolution and impact of Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) for determining vitamin D metabolites.

Stephen A Wise, Adam J Kuszak, Johanna E Camara

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

3 authors.

Stephen A WiseOffice of Dietary Supplements (ODS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, 20817, USA. stephen.wise@nih.gov.
Adam J KuszakOffice of Dietary Supplements (ODS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Bethesda, MD, 20817, USA.
Johanna E CamaraChemical Sciences Division, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in collaboration with the National Institutes of Health, Office of Dietary Supplements (NIH ODS), introduced the first Standard Reference Material® (SRM) for determining vitamin D metabolites in 2009 motivated by significant concerns about the comparability and accuracy of different assays to assess vitamin D status. After 14 years, a suite of five serum matrix SRMs and three calibration solution SRMs are available. Values were also assigned for vitamin D metabolites in five additional SRMs intended primarily to support measurements of other clinical diagnostic markers. Both the SRMs and the certification approach have evolved from significant exogenous serum content to primarily endogenous content and from value assignment by combining the results of multiple analytical methods to the use of measurements exclusively from reference measurement procedures (RMPs). The impact of the availability of these SRMs can be assessed by both the distribution information (sales) and by reports in the scientific literature describing their use for method validation, quality control, and research. In this review, we describe the development of these SRMs, the evolution in design and value assignment, the expansion of information reported, and SRM use in validating analytical methods and providing quality assurance within the vitamin D measurement community.

Indexed as

Vitamin DVitaminsDietary SupplementsQuality ControlReference StandardsVitamin DVitamins25-Hydroxyvitamin D225-Hydroxyvitamin D33-epi-25-Hydroxyvitamin D3Reference measurement procedure (RMP)Total 25-hydroxyvitamin DVitamin D binding protein (VDBP)

Identifiers

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.