Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,066 questions · 3,346 findings · 178 reviews · Dental caries

No studies found 48 · 1.4%GRADE not reported 2,789 · 83.4%Very low 208 · 6.2%Low 129 · 3.9%Moderate 136 · 4.1%High 36 · 1.1%

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

Birth length · pregnant women and their infants..

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower maternal 25(OH)D) for Birth length: WMD 0.19 (95% CI -0.26 to 0.65), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

Subperiosteal erosions · Adults with chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis

Meta-analysis of randomised trials of vitamin D supplementation for Subperiosteal erosions: RR 0.41 (95% CI 0.07 to 2.38), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

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

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

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

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

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

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

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

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

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

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

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

Vitamin D compounds (supplementation) vs placebo or control

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

Vitamin D vs placebo or control

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

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

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

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

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