Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41983293›Full record

ArticleClinical endocrinology2026

Repeated Measurements of Vitamin D: Common and Very Unlikely to Indicate Deficiency.

Mark J Bolland, Cam Kyle, Andrew Grey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endocrinology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Mark J BollandDepartment of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0465-2674
Cam KyleLabplus, Te Toka Tumai Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Andrew GreyDepartment of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7803-0096

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveVitamin D testing uses considerable resources and has increased recently. We investigated repeating testing in Auckland, New Zealand. DESIGN, MEASUREMENT AND PATIENTS: We analysed repeated 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) tests in three databases from the Auckland region from 2005 to 2024 (362,618 tests). We assessed annual numbers, time between tests, characteristics associated with repeat tests, and relationships between requestors and repeated tests.

resultsTwenty-four percent of individuals had ≥ 2 25OHD tests. 34% of all 25OHD tests were repeats. A disproportionately high number of repeat tests were done in a small number of individuals: 57% had one repeated test (i.e., two tests total) but 5.3% had ≥ 6 and 1.4% had ≥ 11 repeated tests. Fifty eight percentage of repeat tests were done within 1 y and 77% within 2 y. 85% of people with repeated tests had a first 25OHD > 25 nmol/L, but in only 9.8% a repeated 25OHD was ≤ 25 nmol/L. Most repeat tests (77%) when the first 25OHD was > 75 nmol/L were > 75 nmol/L A small number of high-volume requestors ordered most tests: 3/7637 ordered > 5000 tests, collectively 7% (21,092) of the total, and 98 ordered > 500 tests (collectively 44%). The most frequent requestors were primary care doctors and bariatric surgeons. Simple restrictions based on the result and time since previous 25OHD could reduce repeated tests by > 60%-90% with only 4%-5% of 'avoided' tests ≤ 25 nmol/L.

conclusionRepeated vitamin D testing is common, and most results are not low. Restricting test availability and targeting those at risk of clinical complications of vitamin D deficiency are likely to reduce unnecessary tests.

Indexed as

Vitamin DVitamin D DeficiencyFemaleHumansMaleNew Zealand25-hydroxyvitamin DVitamin D25OHDdeficiencyinsufficiencytestingvitamin D

Identifiers

PMID41983293
PMCPMC13432608

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.