Psoriasis and Vitamin D: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Psoriasis is a chronic immune-dysregulated inflammatory disease and hypovitaminosis D is considered a risk factor. We conducted an online database search to review and meta-analyze the relationship between vitamin D, other bone metabolism parameters, and psoriasis. The efficacy of oral vitamin D supplementation in improving Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) was also evaluated. Non-original articles, case reports, and animal studies were excluded. Bias risk was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case–control studies, respectively. Unstandardized mean differences were used for data synthesis. Twenty-three studies reported serum 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels in 1876 psoriasis patients and 7532 controls. Psoriasis patients had significantly lower 25(OH)D levels than controls (21.0 ± 8.3 vs. 27.3 ± 9.8, p < 0.00001). Conversely, 450 psoriasis patients had lower levels of parathormone than 417 controls (38.7 ± 12.8 vs. 43.7 ± 16.5, p = 0.015). Four RCTs examined the effect of oral vitamin D supplementation on psoriasis for 173 patients and 160 patients were treated with placebo. No significant differences were found in PASI after 3, 6, and 12 months of supplementation. It is shown that 25(OH)D serum levels are significantly lower in psoriasis, but, although the granularity of RCT methodology may have influenced the pooled analysis, vitamin D supplementation did not seem to improve clinical manifestations.
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 | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.035 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".