A Systematic Review Supporting the Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guidelines on Vitamin D.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to assess the effects of vitamin D supplementation on disease prevention across various populations, including the general population, pregnant women, and adults with prediabetes, and to evaluate dosing and screening strategies.
Results Summary
The study found mixed results: vitamin D reduced respiratory infections in children (low-certainty evidence), showed a very small mortality reduction in adults over 75 (high-certainty evidence), and possibly benefited maternal/fetal outcomes in pregnant women (low-certainty evidence). In adults with prediabetes, it reduced diabetes progression (moderate-certainty evidence), but high-dose intermittent dosing increased falls.
Population
General population (children, adolescents, adults 19-74, adults >75), pregnant women, and adults with prediabetes.
Effective Dosage
High-dose intermittent vs. lower-dose daily (specific amounts not detailed).
Duration
Not specified.
Interactions
None mentioned.
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
vitamin D | decrease | respiratory tract infections | children and adolescents | - | reduction | #1 |
vitamin D | no change | select outcomes | healthy adults aged 19 to 74 years | - | no significant effect | #2 |
vitamin D | decrease | mortality | adults older than 75 years | - | very small reduction | #3 |
vitamin D | increase | various maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes | pregnant women | - | possible benefit | #4 |
vitamin D | decrease | rate of progression to diabetes | adults with prediabetes | - | reduction | #5 |
high-dose intermittent vitamin D | increase | falls | - | - | increase | #6 |
CONTEXT: Low vitamin D status is common and is associated with various common medical conditions. OBJECTIVE: To support the development of the Endocrine Society's Clinical Practice Guideline on Vitamin D for the Prevention of Disease. METHODS: We searched multiple databases for studies that addressed 14 clinical questions prioritized by the guideline panel. Of the 14 questions, 10 clinical questions assessed the effect of vitamin D vs no vitamin D in the general population throughout the lifespan, during pregnancy, and in adults with prediabetes; 1 question assessed dosing; and 3 questions addressed screening with serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25[OH]D). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Electronic searches yielded 37 007 citations, from which we included 151 studies. In children and adolescents, low-certainty evidence suggested reduction in respiratory tract infections with empiric vitamin D. There was no significant effect on select outcomes in healthy adults aged 19 to 74 years with variable certainty of evidence. There was a very small reduction in mortality among adults older than 75 years with high certainty of evidence. In pregnant women, low-certainty evidence suggested possible benefit on various maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes. In adults with prediabetes, moderate certainty of evidence suggested reduction in the rate of progression to diabetes. Administration of high-dose intermittent vitamin D may increase falls, compared to lower-dose daily dosing. We did not identify trials on the benefits and harms of screening with serum 25(OH)D. CONCLUSION: The evidence summarized in this systematic review addresses the benefits and harms of vitamin D for the prevention of disease. The guideline panel considered additional information about individuals' and providers' values and preferences and other important decisional and contextual factors to develop clinical recommendations.