Bone strength
Calciumand Fracture Risk (incidence)
Both sources here found no clear difference in fracture Risk (incidence).
How sure anyone can be
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Further research may change this.
The most certain of the two findings here; each record carries its own.
The numbers reported
One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.
0.971.53 risk ratio2.42
This range crosses the no-difference line, so these numbers fit a real difference and no difference at all equally well.
Two sources, newest first
What we read is the published abstract, not the full paper, so a blank below may still be printed in the paper itself. A fixed rule worked this out from the source’s own fields. Nobody checked this rating by hand.
Systematic review, 2025
Low certainty, level 2 of 4The effects of combined calcium and vitamin D supplementation on bone mineral density and fracture risk in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025;26(1):928. doi:10.1186/s12891-025-09089-7. PMID:41063100.
- Number reported
- 0.98 risk ratio
- Which way it went
- No clear difference
- Likely range
- 0.89 to 1.07
- Source’s own words
- risk ratio for fracture, combined calcium plus vitamin D vs control
- Who was studied
- Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis
- Compared with
- placebo or control
- Amount taken
- Not in the abstract
- For how long
- Not in the abstract
- Disagreement between studies
- I2 = 0% in the large-trial fracture analysis
- Kind of record
- Journal article
How this rating was reachedstarts at High, 2 steps down: risk of bias and imprecision
- Starts at High
- Risk of bias brought it down to Moderatethe abstract reports no risk-of-bias or quality appraisal, so study limitations cannot be ruled outNot in the abstract
- Imprecision brought it down to Lowthe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
- Ends at Low2 steps down.
- Checked, nothing to step it down for
- indirectness
- Inconsistency
- No disagreement reported, and no count of studies behind it
Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.
AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.
Systematic review, 2017
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Association Between Calcium or Vitamin D Supplementation and Fracture Incidence in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
JAMA. 2017;318(24):2466-2482. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.19344. PMID:29279934.
- Number reported
- 1.53 risk ratio
- Which way it went
- No clear difference
- Likely range
- 0.97 to 2.42
- Source’s own words
- risk ratio for hip fracture, calcium supplements vs placebo or no treatment
- Who was studied
- Older adult
- Compared with
- placebo or no treatment
- Amount taken
- Not in the abstract
- For how long
- Not in the abstract
- Disagreement between studies
- Not in the abstract
- Kind of record
- Journal article
How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: imprecision
- Starts at High
- Imprecision brought it down to Moderatethe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
- Ends at ModerateOne step down.
- Checked, nothing to step it down for
- risk of bias and indirectness
- Inconsistency
- No disagreement reported, and no count of studies behind it
Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.
AI-reviewed & signed — an AI agent re-read this finding against the saved source and checked that the quote, the numbers, the units and the direction match it. No person read it. The owner authorised the agent to sign the batch with the owner's key, and every build rechecks that signature against these exact bytes.
What is still missing from these readings
- Two do not say how many people took part.
- Amount taken — Not in the abstract.
- For how long — Not in the abstract.
Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.
Still to read for Calcium
Three of the nine things on our list for Calcium have no reading here yet:
- HDL cholesterol
- LDL cholesterol
- Parathyroid Hormone (PTH)
Still to read means nobody here has got to it, not that it was tried and did nothing or that no research exists. A pairing on no list is not a gap: we never set out to read it.
Read next
Calcium
Five other questions read for it
Bone strength
Ten questions read under it
Fracture Risk (incidence)
No other ingredients read against it
Alphabetical, and by nothing else.
This is a library, not advice. No recommendation, no dose, no diagnosis, no ranking. We never ask about your symptoms, and nothing here is tailored to you.