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
Hip Fracture · Older or community-dwelling adults
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Fractures: hip, Men aged >65 years and postmenopausal women: RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.99 to 1.33), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Alkaline phosphatase · Adults with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Alkaline phosphatase: WMD -21.81 (95% CI -40.39 to 3.22), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Birth length · pregnant women
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Birth length: WMD 0.97 (95% CI -0.41 to 2.34), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD 0.97 [-0.41, 2.34]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Systolic blood pressure · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Systolic blood pressure: WMD -2.39 (95% CI -5.7 to 0.9), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD -2.39 [-5.7, 0.9]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Risk of hyperphosphataemia · Adults with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Risk of hyperphosphataemia: RR 1.58 (95% CI 0.47 to 5.30), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Maternal vitamin D concentration at term (25‐hydroxyvitamin D) (nmol/L) (ALL) · pregnant women
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Maternal vitamin D concentrations at term: WMD 47.08 (95% CI 23.76 to 70.39), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Probable.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD 47.08 [23.76, 70.39]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Bone mineral density · children
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone mineral density (Whole body / total), Healthy children: SMD 0.1 (95% CI -0.06 to 0.26), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.
1 finding from 1 review
SMD 0.1 [-0.06, 0.26]
5 studies
GRADE not reported
Hip/femoral bone mineral density (BMD) · children
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone mineral density in hip, Healthy children: SMD 0.06 (95% CI -0.18 to 0.29), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.
1 finding from 1 review
SMD 0.06 [-0.18, 0.29]
4 studies
GRADE not reported
Bone pain · Adults with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone pain: RR 0.29 (95% CI 0.03 to 2.63), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Bone mineral density · Older or community-dwelling adults
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Bone mineral density, Community-dwelling adults: WMD -0.9 (95% CI -2.10 to 0.40), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
WMD -0.9 [-2.10, 0.40]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Dental caries · children
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Dental caries: RR 0.53 (95% CI 0.43 to 0.65), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Probable.
1 finding from 1 review
All cause mortality (in CKD patients) · Participants in observational studies
The meta-analysis of observational studies reported a RR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.93) for higher versus lower circulating vitamin D concentration.
1 finding from 1 review
Insulin resistance · Adults with diabetes
Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Insulin resistance (Diabetes): SMD 0.16 (95% CI -0.11 to 0.42), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
SMD 0.16 [-0.11, 0.42]
5 studies
GRADE not reported
Type 2 diabetes (prevalent) · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Type 2 diabetes (prevalent): OR 0.45 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.82), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
All cause mortality · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for All cause mortality: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.66 to 0.78), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Rectal cancer · Adults (general population)
Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Rectal cancer: OR 0.50 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.88), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.
1 finding from 1 review
Relative DOR by setting (FC, advanced, occlusal permanent) · Permanent teeth, occlusal surfaces, with suspected caries lesions
No significant setting difference for FC (RDOR 2.96, 0.36 to 24.45).
2 findings from 1 review
More advanced caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with approximal surfaces
Pooled specificity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=89%; no GRADE rating was reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Initial caries lesion detection · Primary teeth with occlusal surfaces
Pooled sensitivity was reported, but the numerical estimate is not stated in the supplied text or attached figures; I²=0%; no GRADE rating was reported.
2 findings from 1 review
Sensitivity 0.482 [0.433, 0.531]
2 studies
GRADE not reported
Specificity 0.815 [0.713, 0.892]
2 studies
GRADE not reported