SynthesisFrontiers in medicine2026
Efficacy and safety of vitamin D in the treatment of asthma: an overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Frontiers in medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Asthma is a common chronic airway disease that can cause recurrent symptoms, acute exacerbations, impaired quality of life, and substantial healthcare burden. Vitamin D has been proposed as a potential add-on therapy because of its roles in immune regulation and respiratory defense, but its clinical benefits in asthma remain uncertain. Objective: This umbrella review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of vitamin D supplementation as an adjunctive treatment for asthma and to assess the credibility of the existing evidence. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, CNKI, WANFANG, VIP, and CBM from inception to November 26, 2025. Published systematic reviews and meta-analyses evaluating vitamin D supplementation for asthma were included. We assessed methodological quality, risk of bias, reporting quality, certainty of evidence, and overlap among primary studies using standard appraisal tools. Results: 21 systematic reviews and meta-analyses were included. Overlap among primary studies was substantial. Vitamin D supplementation was associated with a lower risk of asthma exacerbations, but its effects on asthma control, lung function, and inflammatory outcomes were limited or inconsistent. No significant increase in adverse events was observed. The certainty of evidence varied across outcomes, and many findings were supported by low or very low certainty evidence. Conclusion: Vitamin D supplementation may reduce asthma exacerbations and appears to be safe as an adjunctive treatment, but current evidence does not consistently support improvements in daily symptom control, lung function, or inflammatory outcomes. These findings should be interpreted cautiously because of heterogeneity, evidence uncertainty, and overlap among primary studies. Future studies should identify patients most likely to benefit and clarify optimal dose, duration, and biomarker-guided supplementation strategies. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251239612, identifier: CRD420251239612.
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.