Small doses of vitamin D do not reduce risk of Acute Respiratory Infection - meta-analysis

Efficacy of Vitamin D Supplements in Prevention of Acute Respiratory Infection: A Meta-Analysis for Randomized Controlled Trials

Nutrients 2022, 14(4), 818; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14040818 (registering DOI)

by Hae-Eun Cho 1,Seung-Kwon Myung 2,3,4,* and Herim Cho 1

Background: Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have reported inconsistent results regarding the efficacy of vitamin D supplements in the prevention of acute respiratory infections (ARIs).

Methods: We investigated these efficacy results by using a meta-analysis of RCTs. We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library in June 2021.

Results: Out of 390 trials searched from the database, a total of 30 RCTs involving 30,263 participants were included in the final analysis. In the meta-analysis of all the trials, vitamin D supplementation showed no significant effect in the prevention of ARIs (relative risk (RR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91–1.01, I2 = 59.0%, n = 30). In the subgroup meta-analysis, vitamin D supplementation was effective in daily supplementation (RR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.73–0.95, I2 = 69.1%, n = 15) and short-term supplementation (RR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.71–0.97, I2 = 66.8%, n = 13). However, such beneficial effects disappeared in the subgroup meta-analysis of high-quality studies (RR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.78–1.02, I2 = 67.0%, n = 10 assessed by the Jadad scale; RR 0.87, 95% CI, 0.66–1.15, I2 = 51.0%, n = 4 assessed by the Cochrane’s risk of bias tool). Additionally, publication bias was observed.

Conclusions: The current meta-analysis found that vitamin D supplementation has no clinical effect in the prevention of ARIs.

📄 Download the PDF from VitaminDWiki

VitaminDWiki - both categories Breathing and Met-analysis

{category}

Breathing items with ACUTE in title

This list is automatically updated

{LIST()}