Vitamin D Supplementation and Mortality in the Elderly: A Review of a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Using the REB Method
Kostakis N, Lega JC, Boussageon R
Fundamental & clinical pharmacology · 0 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
Según la declaración de financiación del texto completo.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2026-10-01 · Fundam Clin Pharmacol · vol. 40 · número 6 · pág. e70112
- Editorial
- Wiley
- Citado
- 0 citas · más que el 82% de estudios similares · 0.0× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 32 trabajos
- Acceso
- Acceso abierto (revista híbrida) · CC-BY-NC-ND
- Áreas de investigación
- Vitamin D Research Studies · Nutrition and Health Studies · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Palabras clave
- vitamin D supplementation, mortality, older adults, all-cause mortality, level of evidence, risk of bias, randomized controlled trials, sensitivity analysis
- MeSH
- humans, vitamin d deficiency, vitamin d, mortality, double-blind method, dietary supplements, aged, randomized controlled trials as topic
3 autores
- Natalia Kostakis🇫🇷 · autor de correspondenciaLyon 1 Université
- Jean‐Christophe Lega🇫🇷 · autor de correspondenciaLyon 1 Université; Hospices Civils de Lyon; Hôpital Lyon Sud; Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive
- Rémy Boussageon🇫🇷 · autor de correspondenciaLyon 1 Université; Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Background
The results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the effect of vitamin D supplementation on mortality reduction are conflicting.
Objective
The aim of this study was to assess the level of evidence through a sensitivity analysis of the meta-analysis by Shah et al. (2024) using the Rebuilt the Evidence Base (REB) method.
Methods
The main inclusion criterion was a double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT design. The exclusion criteria were trials combining vitamin D with other nutrients and unpublished RCTs. The main outcome was all-cause mortality. A bias analysis was performed, followed by a hypothetico-deductive analysis to determine the confirmatory or exploratory nature of each RCT. The REB method was used to interpret the results and assess the level of evidence.
Results
Among the 25 RCTs included in the meta-analysis by Shah et al., the analysis was performed on 8 RCTs at low risk of bias including 30 320 participants. Seven RCTs raised some concerns, and two RCTs were at high risk of bias according to ROB2. Bias arose from the randomization process, deviations from intended interventions, missing outcome data, and selection of the reported results. The results were statistically significant, in favor of vitamin D supplementation: RR = 0.96 (95% CI [0.92, 1.00]), p = 0.04. No RCT was conclusive.
Conclusion
According to the REB method, there is an evidence signal regarding the benefit of vitamin D supplementation in the population aged 75 and older, which remains to be confirmed.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY-NC-ND).
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.