The Effect of Vitamin D on Inflammation and Dyslipidemia in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Protocol for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that contributes to an increasing global burden on the health system. It has a high chance of leading to macrovascular complications and cardiovascular disease. As an inflammatory condition, it would be essential to target inflammatory pathways when developing therapeutic drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the effect of vitamin D on markers of inflammation and lipid profile among adult patients with diabetes. METHODS: A systematic review will seek studies published on Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, and Science Direct. This planned systematic review and meta-analysis will be limited to randomized controlled trials; moreover, the search will include published studies regarding the effects of vitamin D on pro-inflammatory cytokines and lipid profiles. The review will include studies published from inception until December 30, 2022. The study identification and selection will be based on the eligibility criteria by 2 independent reviewers. Additionally, a meta-analysis will only be performed if more than 2 studies are available and explore the same outcomes, and this will be analyzed using RevMan (version 5.4.1). The quality and risk of bias will be assessed following the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Jadad checklist. RESULTS: The process for searching literature review has already started, and this is conducted independently by 2 reviewers using a predefined eligibility and "participants, intervention, comparator, and outcome" criteria. This systematic review and meta-analysis will not require any direct involvement of patients and the public; thus, no ethical approval was required. CONCLUSIONS: The findings obtained from the proposed study will be presented in scientific seminars, journal clubs, and conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Platform of Registered Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols INPLASY202260022; https://inplasy.com/?s=INPLASY202260022. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/42193.
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 | 0.095 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.028 | 0.040 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.007 |
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".