All‐cause mortality · Adults with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Mortality: RR 1.40 (95% CI 0.38 to 5.15), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Colorectal cancer · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 1,25(OH)2D) for Colorectal cancer: OR 1.01 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.73), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.
1 finding from 1 review
OR 1.01 [0.59, 1.73]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
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
Small‐for‐gestational age · pregnant women
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Small for gestational age: RR 0.67 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.11), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.
1 finding from 1 review
Creatinine clearance · Adults with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Creatinine clearance: WMD -1.68 (95% CI -6.92 to 3.56), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD -1.68 [-6.92, 3.56]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Risk of hyperphosphataemia · Adults with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Risk of hyperphosphataemia: RR 1.57 (95% CI 0.97 to 2.54), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Fracture · Adults with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Fractures: RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.06 to 15.41), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
RR 1.00 [0.06, 15.41]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Hypercalcaemia · Adults with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Risk of hypercalcaemia: RR 3.04 (95% CI 1.17 to 7.90), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.
1 finding from 1 review
Bone mineral density in forearm · children
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone mineral density in forearm, Healthy children: SMD 0.04 (95% CI -0.36 to 0.45), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.
1 finding from 1 review
SMD 0.04 [-0.36, 0.45]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Tuberculosis · Participants in observational studies
The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a SMD (to OR) of 0.29 (95% CI 0.19 to 0.46) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.
1 finding from 1 review
Preterm birth · pregnant women
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Preterm delivery: RR 0.77 (95% CI 0.35 to 1.66), not statistically significant.
1 finding from 1 review
Birthweight (g) · pregnant women and their infants..
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower maternal 25(OH)D) for Birth weight: WMD 130.9 (95% CI 75.1 to 186.7), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Probable.
1 finding from 1 review
Fractures: vertebral or deformity · Older or community-dwelling adults
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Fractures: vertebral or deformity, Men aged >65 years and postmenopausal women: RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.42 to 1.92), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Bone mineral density in forearm · Community dwelling adults
The meta-analysis of RCTs reported a WMD of -0.70 (95% CI 1.70 to 0.40) for vitamin d supplementation versus control.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD -0.70 [-1.70, 0.40]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
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
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
Breast cancer · Participants in observational studies
The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a OR of 0.99 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.47) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.
1 finding from 1 review
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
Cholesterol mg/dL · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Total cholesterol: WMD 1.52 (95% CI -1.42 to 4.46), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD 1.52 [-1.42, 4.46]
11 studies
GRADE not reported
Parathyroid hormone · Adults with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Parathyroid hormone: WMD -196.05 (95% CI -298.43 to -93.66), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Probable.
1 finding from 1 review