Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration: Breast cancer
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer (Premenopausal): RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.06), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration Breast cancer · Adults (general population) · Premenopausal Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer (Premenopausal): RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.06), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely. Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of… (2014) All outcomes | RR 1.01 [0.97, 1.06] | 6 studies · 2890 participants | GRADE not reported |
Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration Breast cancer · Adults (general population) · Postmenopausal Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer (Postmenopausal): RR 0.99 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.01), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely. Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of… (2014) All outcomes | RR 0.99 [0.97, 1.01] | 9 studies · 8766 participants | GRADE not reported |
Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration Breast cancer · Adults (general population) Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer: OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.71), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion. Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of… (2014) All outcomes | OR 0.55 [0.42, 0.71] | 21 studies · 26317 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vitamin D and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies and randomised… 2014 All outcomes | 11 October 2013 | 55 | Not applicable |
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.