Questioning vitamin D status of elderly fallers and nonfallers: a meta‐analysis to address a ‘forgotten step’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses to determine the efficacy of vitamin D supplementation to prevent falls in the elderly have shown mixed results. Inconsistencies might depend on the dose of supplements, suggesting that serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25OHD) concentration could influence the risk of falling. Our objective was to systematically review and quantitatively analyse the relationship between serum 25OHD concentration and the occurrence of falls. METHODS: A Medline search was conducted in December 2013, with no date limit, using the Medical Subject Heading terms 'Vitamin D' OR 'Ergocalciferols' OR 'Vitamin D deficiency' combined with 'Accidental Falls' OR 'Gait disorders, neurologic' OR 'Gait apraxia' OR 'Gait' OR 'Recurrent Falls' OR 'Falling'. Fixed and random-effects meta-analyses were performed to determine the following: (i) the effect size of the difference in 25OHD concentration between fallers and nonfallers and (ii) the risk of falling according to serum 25OHD concentration. RESULTS: Of the 659 retrieved studies, 18 observational studies - including ten cross-sectional and eight cohort studies - met the selection criteria. All were of good quality. The number of participants ranged from 80 to 2957 (44-100% women); 11.0% to 69.3% were fallers. Serum 25OHD concentrations were 0.33 × SD lower in fallers compared to nonfallers [pooled effect size 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18-0.47]. The risk of falls was inversely associated with serum 25OHD concentration [summary odds ratio (OR) 0.97; 95% CI 0.96-0.99]. The association between falls and hypovitaminosis D varied according to the definition used; the summary OR for falls was 1.23 (95% CI 0.94-1.60) for 25OHD <10 ng mL(-1) , 1.44 (95% CI 1.17-1.76) for 25OHD <20 ng mL(-1) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.81-1.11) for 25OHD <30 ng mL(-1) . CONCLUSIONS: Fallers have lower 25OHD concentrations, notably more often <20 ng mL(-1) , than nonfallers. These findings help to determine the profile of target populations that would most benefit from vitamin D supplements to prevent falls.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".