Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Heart and blood pressure

Vitamin B12and Major cardiovascular events

Only one source here so far, and it found no clear difference in major cardiovascular events.

How sure anyone can be

Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

Further research may change this.

The numbers reported

One source’s range, drawn against its own line of no difference and scaled to its own numbers.

0.941 risk ratio1.07

This range crosses the no-difference line, so these numbers fit a real difference and no difference at all equally well.

Bar the confidence interval — the range the true effect is likely to sit inNotch the number the source reportedLine where there would be no difference at all

One source, 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, 2016 · 8 studies pooled

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

    [Meta-analysis on effect of combined supplementation of folic acid, vitamin B12 and B6 on risk of cardio-cerebrovascular diseases in randomized control trials].

    Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2016;37(7):1028-34. doi:10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2016.07.024. PMID:27453118.

    Number reported
    1 risk ratio
    Which way it went
    No clear difference
    Likely range
    0.94 to 1.07
    Source’s own words
    relative risk of cardiovascular disease events vs control
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    control
    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
    1. Starts at High
    2. Imprecision brought it down to Moderatethe confidence interval includes no effectReported in the abstract
    3. Ends at ModerateOne step down.
    Checked, nothing to step it down for
    risk of bias and indirectness
    Inconsistency
    No high disagreement reported between the 8 studies it pooled

    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.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • One 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 Vitamin B12

Eight of the 16 things on our list for Vitamin B12 have no reading here yet:

  • Brain Atrophy Rate (MRI Volume Loss)
  • Holotranscobalamin (active B12)
  • Methylmalonic acid (MMA)
  • Muscle strength (1-RM)
  • Sleep onset latency
  • Total sleep time
  • Vitamin B12
  • Wake after sleep onset (WASO)

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

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.