ArticleNutrition & diabetes2024
Sex differences in the association between vitamin D and prediabetes in adults: A cross-sectional study.
Article in Nutrition & diabetes, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Relationship between vitamin D serum concentration and inflammatory bowel disease demographics: A cross-sectional study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Sex-Based Differences in the Vitamin D Metabolite Ratio and Its Associated Factors Among Healthy Japanese Adults: A Cross-Sectional Study.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Radiomorphometric and texture-based mandibular bone assessment in type 2 diabetes mellitus: correlation with vitamin D, osteocalcin, and glycemic control-an analytical cross-sectional study.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Sex differences in melanoma survival-a GEM study.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesVitamin D status has been shown to be associated with prediabetes risk. However, epidemiologic evidence on whether sex modulates the association between vitamin D and prediabetes is limited. The present study investigated sex-specific associations between vitamin D and prediabetes. SUBJECTS/
methodsThe Kuwait Wellbeing Study, a population-based cross-sectional study, enrolled nondiabetic adults. Prediabetes was defined as 5.7 ≤ HbA1c% ≤6.4; 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) was measured in venous blood and analyzed as a continuous, dichotomous (deficiency: <50 nmol/L vs. insufficiency/sufficiency ≥50 nmol/L), and categorical (tertiles) variable. Associations were evaluated by estimating adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), while stratifying by sex.
resultsA total of 384 participants (214 males and 170 females) were included in the current analysis, with a median age of 40.5 (interquartile range: 33.0-48.0) years. The prevalence of prediabetes was 35.2%, and 63.0% of participants had vitamin D deficiency. Assessments of statistical interaction between sex and 25(OH)D status were statistically significant (P
conclusionsSex modified the association between vitamin D levels and prediabetes, with an inverse association observed among males, but not among females. Moreover, the observed sex-disparity in the prevalence of prediabetes was only pronounced at 25(OH)D levels of ≤35 nmol/L.
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.