Evidence Hub

Association between vitamin D supplementation and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

Yu Zhang, Fang Fang, Jingjing Tang, Lu Jia, Yuning Feng, Ping Xu, Andrew M. Faramand

BMJ, 2019

74 participants · 369 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective To investigate whether vitamin D supplementation is associated with lower mortality in adults. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Data sources Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register from their inception to 26 December 2018. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials comparing vitamin D supplementation with a placebo or no treatment for mortality were included. Independent data extraction was conducted and study quality assessed. A meta-analysis was carried out by using fixed effects and random effects models to calculate risk ratio of death in the group receiving vitamin D supplementation and the control group. Main outcome measures All cause mortality. Results 50 trials with a total of 74 655 participants were identified. Vitamin D supplementation was not associated with all cause mortality (risk ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.02, I 2 =0%), cardiovascular mortality (0.98, 0.88 to 1.08, 0%), or non-cancer, non-cardiovascular mortality (1.05, 0.93 to 1.18, 0%). Vitamin D supplementation statistically significantly reduced the risk of cancer death (0.85, 0.74 to 0.97, 0%). In subgroup analyses, all cause mortality was significantly lower in trials with vitamin D 3 supplementation than in trials with vitamin D 2 supplementation (P for interaction=0.04); neither vitamin D 3 nor vitamin D 2 was associated with a statistically significant reduction in all cause…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 74 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free