MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344229849 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154215

Effect of Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Inflammatory Markers and Glycemic Measures among Overweight or Obese Adults: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

2016· review· en· W2344229849 on OpenAlexaff
Aleksandra M. Zuk, Tiffany Fitzpatrick, Laura C. Rosella

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVitamin D Research Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialGlycemicPlaceboOverweightCochrane LibraryVitamin D and neurologyGastroenterologyObesityInsulinPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Obesity induced low-grade chronic inflammation disrupts proper immune and metabolic function. Vitamin D deficiency increases inflammation, which is associated with cardiometabolic risk. This systematic review examines the association between oral vitamin D (VD) supplementation and circulating inflammatory biomarkers and glycemic outcomes from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of overweight and/or obese adults. METHODS: MEDLINE OVID, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched according to a predefined protocol. Eligible RCTs included adults randomized to receive either oral VD or placebo. Two reviewers independently assessed RCTs for inclusion. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool. Mean differences were calculated comparing end-of-study sample means between the independent VD and placebo groups. RESULTS: Eleven unique RCTs met inclusion criteria from a total of 3,383 identified citations, including 79 screened articles and 14 full text data extractions. Inflammatory and glycemic measures were reported in 7 and 10 RCTs, respectively. Most trial findings were non-significant with considerable heterogeneity in design, participants and outcomes. All but one trial was rated as either high or unclear risk of bias. Two RCTs reported significant changes in inflammatory biomarkers; however, the mean difference between groups was not statistically significant: C-reactive protein 0.19 mg/L (p = 0.88); Tumor Necrosis Factor -0.54 pg/ml (p = 0.20). Two other trials found significant mean differences in fasting plasma glucose -0.32 mmol/L (p = 0.03), Hemoglobin A1c -0.13% (p = 0.04), and Homeostatic Model Assessment -0.86 (p = 0.02) following VD supplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is no clear established benefit of VD supplementation on inflammatory biomarkers among overweight/obese adults. Baseline serum VD possibly influences the effect of VD repletion on inflammatory markers. Risk of bias was present in most studies, thus supporting the need for higher quality studies in this area to more conclusively understand the role VD supplementation has on inflammatory pathways.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.012
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations44
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicVitamin D Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207