Vitamin D vs placebo: Rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids
Summary of findings table ‐ Vitamin D showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with one or more exacerbations treated… compared with placebo (high certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings table ‐ Vitamin D vs placebo Proportion of participants with one or more exacerbations treated with systemic corticosteroids · children and adults with predominantly mild to moderate asthma Summary of findings table ‐ Vitamin D showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with one or more exacerbations treated… compared with placebo (high certainty). Vitamin D for the management of asthma (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 1.04 [0.81, 1.34] | 14 studies · 1778 participants | High |
Vitamin D vs placebo Rate ratio, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids · children and adults with predominantly mild to moderate asthma Vitamin D leads to lower rate ratio, exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids compared with placebo (high certainty). Vitamin D for the management of asthma (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD011511.PUB2, superseded | RR 0.64 [0.46, 0.9] | 3 studies · 680 participants | High |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin D for the management of asthma 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.