Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

178 questions · 227 findings · 11 reviews · All outcomes

No studies found 2 · 0.9%GRADE not reported 220 · 96.9%Very low 4 · 1.8%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 0.4%High 0 · 0%

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

All cause mortality · people with chronic kidney disease (predialysis (GFR 15 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), HD, PD, transplant recipients)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for All cause mortality, Patients with chronic kidney disease: RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Metabolic syndrome (prevalent) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Metabolic syndrome (prevalent): OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.64), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Cognitive function · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cognition: OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.53), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Pancreatic cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Pancreatic cancer: OR 2.13 (95% CI 1.02 to 4.47), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Hip Fracture · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Hip fracture (Population-based controls): log ratio of geometric mean -0.51 (95% CI -0.64 to -0.38), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

2 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (Females): OR 0.81 (95% CI 0.39 to 1.70), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

2 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Hypertension · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Hypertension: RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.86), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Aggressive prostate cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Aggressive prostate cancer: OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.15), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Cardiovascular mortality · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cardiovascular disease mortality: RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.85), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Cardiovascular disease (prevalent) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cardiovascular disease (prevalent): OR 0.67 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.82), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Ovarian cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Ovarian cancer: OR 0.83 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.09), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Stroke · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Stroke: RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.50 to 0.75), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Colon cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Colon cancer: OR 0.78 (95% CI 0.56 to 1.07), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Colorectal cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Colorectal cancer: RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.84), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

CVD · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cardiovascular disease: RR 0.66 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.77), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Depression · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Depression (Cohort studies): HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.72), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

2 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Ischaemic stroke · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Ischaemic stroke (Hazard ratio (cohort studies)): HR 0.66 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.80), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

2 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Kidney cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Kidney cancer: OR 1.01 (95% CI 0.65 to 1.58), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Body‐mass index (BMI) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Body mass index: Z score -0.15 (95% CI -0.19 to -0.11), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Sporadic colorectal adenoma · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Sporadic colorectal adenoma: OR 0.82 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.97), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review