Bone strength
Vitamin Dand Bone Health
All three sources here found no clear difference in bone Health.
How sure anyone can be
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Further research may change this.
The most certain of the three 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.
0.981.06 risk ratio1.14
This range crosses the no-difference line, so these numbers fit a real difference and no difference at all equally well.
Three 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 person checked the claim and recorded their own reason for each step down.
Randomised trial, 2022
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Supplemental Vitamin D and Incident Fractures in Midlife and Older Adults.
LeBoff MS, Chou SH, Ratliff KA, et al. Supplemental Vitamin D and Incident Fractures in Midlife and Older Adults. N Engl J Med. 2022. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2202106. PMID:35939577.
- Number reported
- 0.98 hazard ratio
- Which way it went
- No clear difference
- Likely range
- Not in the abstract
- Source’s own words
- hazard ratio total incident fracture vitamin D3 vs placebo
- Who was studied
- Adult
- Compared with
- placebo
- Amount taken
- 2,000 iu/d
- For how long
- Not in the abstract
- Disagreement between studies
- Not in the abstract
- Kind of record
- Randomised controlled trial
How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: a reviewer's own judgement
- Starts at High
- A reviewer's own judgement brought it down to Moderatesingle large randomised trial not deficiency selected
- Ends at ModerateOne step down.
- Not written down for this rating
- risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision and inconsistency
Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.
Systematic review, 2019 · 11 studies pooled · 34,243 participants
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Vitamin D and Calcium for the Prevention of Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Yao P, Bennett D, Mafham M, Lin X, Chen Z, Armitage J, et al. Vitamin D and Calcium for the Prevention of Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Netw Open. 2019;2(12):e1917789. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.17789. PMID:31860103.
- Number reported
- 1.06 risk ratio
- Which way it went
- No clear difference
- Likely range
- 0.98 to 1.14
- Source’s own words
- risk ratio any fracture with vitamin D alone
- Who was studied
- Adult
- Compared with
- placebo or control
- Amount taken
- 400 to 30,000 iu/d
- For how long
- Not in the abstract
- Disagreement between studies
- No significant heterogeneity between RCTs for any fracture (Q = 14.5; df = 10; P = .15; I2 = 31.1%).
- Kind of record
- Systematic review and meta-analysis
How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: a reviewer's own judgement
- Starts at High
- A reviewer's own judgement brought it down to Moderatelarge randomised trial meta analysis not deficiency selected
- Ends at ModerateOne step down.
- Not written down for this rating
- risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision and inconsistency
Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.
Systematic review, 2018
Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4Vitamin D, Calcium, or Combined Supplementation for the Primary Prevention of Fractures in Community-Dwelling Adults: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
Kahwati LC, Weber RP, Pan H, Gourlay M, LeBlanc E, Coker-Schwimmer M, et al. Vitamin D, Calcium, or Combined Supplementation for the Primary Prevention of Fractures in Community-Dwelling Adults: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA. 2018;319(15):1600-1612. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.21640. PMID:29677308.
- Number reported
- -0.01
- Which way it went
- No clear difference
- Likely range
- Not in the abstract
- Source’s own words
- absolute risk difference percentage points for hip fracture with vitamin D alone
- Who was studied
- Adult
- Compared with
- placebo
- Amount taken
- Recorded detail — iu/d
- For how long
- Not in the abstract
- Disagreement between studies
- Not in the abstract
- Kind of record
- Systematic review
How this rating was reachedstarts at High, one step down: a reviewer's own judgement
- Starts at High
- A reviewer's own judgement brought it down to Moderateprimary prevention population not deficiency selected
- Ends at ModerateOne step down.
- Not written down for this rating
- risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision and inconsistency
Published before the signing gate; not yet re-verified.
What is still missing from these readings
- Two give no likely range, so how precise those numbers are is unknown.
- Two do not say how many people took part.
- For how long — Not in the abstract.
Something nobody wrote down is never a zero and never a guess.
Vitamin D is not on our to-read list
Vitamin D is not on our to-read list, so nothing here is set out to read next for it.
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
Vitamin D
One other question read for it
Bone strength
Ten questions read under it
Bone Health
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.