SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2024
Efficacy of vitamin D supplementation on depressive symptoms in older patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Nutritional interventions for late-life depression: evidence, mechanisms, and clinical assessment tools.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
- Vitamin D deficiency, depression severity, and suicide risk: evidence from patients with major depressive disorder.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2026Article
- The Role of Vitamin D in the Management of Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The role of vitamin D in sleep regulation: mechanisms, clinical advances, and future directions.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The relationship between vitamin D and depression has garnered significant attention in recent years. However, the efficacy of vitamin D in ameliorating depression among specific subgroups of older patients remains controversial. This study aimed to assess the impact of vitamin D supplementation on depressive symptoms and the prevalence of depression in older adults. Additionally, the study sought to examine potential moderating factors, including differences among population subgroups and various supplementation strategies. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to March 2024. The RevMan 5.3 software was utilized to calculate the standardized mean difference (SMD) and to evaluate the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The objective was to determine the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in alleviating depressive symptoms or treating depression in older adults. Results: This meta-analysis encompassed eleven studies, comprising a total of 21,561 participants. The findings did not indicate a statistically significant therapeutic benefit of vitamin D supplementation for depression in older patients [SMD: -0.10; 95% CI: (-1.19, 0.00); Conclusion: The current evidence is insufficient to conclusively establish the significant efficacy of vitamin D supplementation in alleviating depressive symptoms among older patients. Consequently, additional randomized controlled trials are warranted to further validate the relationship between vitamin D supplementation and depression in the older adults.
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.