Skip to the main content
Open WellbeingWhat the studies actually measured

Vitamin and mineral levels

Vitamin Dand 25-hydroxyvitamin D

Only one source here so far, and it measured higher 25-hydroxyvitamin D.

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.

17.60419.848 ng/mL22.091

This range stays on one side of the no-difference line.

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 person went through the criteria and recorded which brought the rating down. Their reasons are not on record here.

  • Randomised trial · 192 participants

    Moderate certainty, level 3 of 4

    Not in the abstract

    Effect of vitamin D supplementation on cardiometabolic risks and health-related quality of life among urban premenopausal women in a tropical country--a randomized controlled trial. — PLoS One 2014

    Number reported
    19.84775641025641 ng/mL
    Which way it went
    Higher
    Likely range
    17.604166666666664 to 22.091346153846153
    Source’s own words
    ng/mL serum 25(OH)D mean difference vs placebo (CD-2 receipt sha256:adc9de199d12… converted from nmol/L)
    Who was studied
    Adult
    Compared with
    placebo
    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 reason for this step is not on record here.
    3. Ends at ModerateOne step down.
    Not written down for this rating
    risk of bias, indirectness and inconsistency

    Imprecision stops at the first check that applies; others may apply too.

    Signed & machine-rechecked — a person signed the exact source records, and the software re-derived this rating from them and got the same answer.

    Read the abstract on PubMed

What is still missing from these readings

  • 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.

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

  • Vitamin and mineral levels

    15 questions read under it

  • 25-hydroxyvitamin D

    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.