The Effects of Vitamin D and Marine Omega‐3 Fatty Acid Supplementation on Chronic Knee Pain in Older US Adults: Results From a Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Knee pain from osteoarthritis is frequent in the adult population. Prior trials have had conflicting results concerning the therapeutic effects of vitamin D on knee pain, and few trials have investigated marine Omega-3 fatty acids (n-3 FA). METHODS: In the double-blind, placebo-controlled Vitamin D and Omega-3 Trial (VITAL), 25,871 US adults were randomized in a 2-by-2 factorial design to receive vitamin D or n-3 FA. We identified a subgroup with chronic knee pain prior to randomization and assessed knee pain at baseline and annually during follow-up using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) (graded on a 0-100 scale, where 100 indicates worst symptoms). Repeated measures modeling was used to test the effect of randomized treatment on WOMAC pain scores over follow-up after adjustment for age and sex. Analyses were repeated for WOMAC function and stiffness. RESULTS: This study included 1,398 participants who returned at least one knee pain questionnaire. The mean age was 67.7 years, 66% were women, and the mean ± SD WOMAC pain score was 37 ± 19. The mean ± SD follow-up time was 5.3 ± 0.7 years. WOMAC pain did not differ between the active vitamin D group and the vitamin D placebo group or between the active n-3 FA group and the n-3 FA placebo group at any time point during follow-up. Linear time-by-treatment interactions were not significant for either treatment (vitamin D, P = 0.41; n-3 FA, P = 0.77). Vitamin D and n-3 FA supplementation did not significantly affect WOMAC function or stiffness scores over time. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate that vitamin D and n-3 FA supplementation for a mean of 5.3 years does not reduce knee pain or improve function or stiffness in a large sample of US adults with chronic knee pain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".