Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

678 questions · 854 findings · 51 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 38 · 4.4%GRADE not reported 675 · 79%Very low 61 · 7.1%Low 47 · 5.5%Moderate 32 · 3.7%High 1 · 0.1%

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

Mortality (all cause) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Mortality (all cause) (Vitamin D2, general population): RR 1.04 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.11), 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

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

Serum fasting triglyceride (TG, mmol/L) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Triglycerides: WMD -1.92 (95% CI -7.72 to 3.88), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration vs Lower circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration

Breast cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 1,25(OH)2D) for Breast cancer: OR 0.99 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.44), 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

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

High density lipoprotein · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for High density lipoprotein: WMD -0.14 (95% CI -0.99 to 0.71), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration vs Lower circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration

Colon cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 1,25(OH)2D) for Colon cancer: OR 0.88 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.35), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration vs Lower circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration

Aggressive prostate cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 1,25(OH)2D) for Aggressive prostate cancer: OR 0.75 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.17), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration vs Lower circulating 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) concentration

Prostate cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 1,25(OH)2D) for Prostate cancer: OR 0.99 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.14), 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

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

Serum low‐density lipoprotein (LDL, mmol/L) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Low density lipoprotein: WMD 3.23 (95% CI 0.55 to 5.9), 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

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