ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
The relationship between nutrition status indicators and vitamin D deficiency in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the association between nutrition status indicators and vitamin D deficiency in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. Patients and methods: This cross-sectional study enrolled 285 hospitalized T2DM patients from Hebei General Hospital. Vitamin D deficiency was defined as serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) < 20 ng/mL. Nutritional indicators, including total protein, albumin, prealbumin, body mass index (BMI), uric acid (UA), hemoglobin (Hb), and other information, were collected from medical records. Logistic regression, subgroup, and sensitivity analyses were used to explore the relationship between nutrition indicators and vitamin D deficiency. Results: The prevalence of vitamin D deficiency was 62% (178/285). Compared with the no vitamin D deficiency group, the vitamin D deficiency group had significantly lower total protein (67.4 ± 5.9 vs. 69.4 ± 6.1 g/L, Conclusion: The nutrition indicator (total protein) was negatively related to vitamin D deficiency.
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.